Chemosphere 317 (2023) 137850

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chemosphere
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/chemosphere

Increasing resilience through nudges in the urban water cycle: An

integrative conceptual framework to support policy decision-making
Manel Poch a, *, Carolina Aldao b, Lluís Godo-Pla a, c, Hèctor Monclús a,
Lucia Alexandra Popartan a, Joaquim Comas a, d, Manuel Cermerón-Romero e, Sebastià Puig a,
María Molinos-Senante f, g
a
LEQUIA. Institute of the Environment, Universitat de Girona, C/ Maria Aurèlia Capmany, 69, 17003, Girona, Spain
b
Faculty of Tourism, Universitat de Girona, Plaça Josep Ferrater i Móra, 1, 17004, Girona, Spain
c
Createch Drinking Solutions, Costa d’en Paratge St. 22, E1 08500 Vic, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
d
ICRA-CERCA. Catalan Institute for Water Research, Emili Grahit 101, 17003, Girona, Spain
e
Agbar, Passeig de La Zona Franca, 48, Barcelona, Spain
f
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering Department, Avda. Vicuña Mackenna, 4860, Santiago, Chile
g
Research Center for the Integrated Management of Natural Disasters (CIGIDEN), ANID/FONDAP/15110017, Vicuña Mackenna, Santiago, 4860, Chile

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

• This framework extends the use of

nudges to the overall urban water cycle.
• It considers 4th water revolution, digi­
talization, decentralization, climate
change.
• It could be used by decision-makers in
transit to a sustainable urban water
cycle.

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling editor. Vincenzo Naddeo Relevant challenges associated with the urban water cycle must be overcome to meet the United Nations Sus­
tainable Development Goals (SDGs) and improve resilience. Unlike previous studies that focused only on the
Keywords: provision of drinking water, we propose a framework that extends the use of the theory of nudges to all stages of
Urban water cycle the overall urban water cycle (drinking water and wastewater services), and to agents of influence (citizens,
Sustainable development goals
organizations, and governments) at different levels of decision making. The framework integrates four main
Resilience
drivers (the fourth water revolution, digitalization, decentralization, and climate change), which influence how
Nudges
Water utilities customers, water utilities and regulators approach the challenges posed by the urban water cycle. The proposed
framework, based on the theory of nudges first advanced by the Nobel Prize in behavioral economics Richard H.
Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein (Thaler and Sunstein, 2009), serves as a reference for policymakers to define me­
dium- and long-term strategies and policies for improving the sustainability and resilience of the urban water

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Poch).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.137850
Received 6 May 2022; Received in revised form 28 November 2022; Accepted 10 January 2023
Available online 16 January 2023
0045-6535/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc/4.0/).
M. Poch et al. Chemosphere 317 (2023) 137850

cycle. Finally, we provide new insights for further research on resilience approaches to the management of the
urban water cycle as an element to support the more efficient formulation of policies.

1. Introduction operationalizing the potential use of nudges to the entire urban water
cycle, thus integrating both drinking water and sanitation services in
Planning, designing and managing sustainable urban water systems this conceptual toolbox. Moreover, the framework aims to increase the
in the context of climate change, population growth and aging infra­ array of agents targeted by nudges, beyond the water users currently
structure pose some of the greatest challenges for the 21st century considered in the literature. Including water and sanitation providers
(Larsen et al., 2016; Tortajada, 2020). To address these challenges, the and water regulators would make the nudges system more robust and
water sector is undergoing a paradigmatic change (Sedlak, 2014): along able to enhance the resilience in the provision of drinking water and
with the traditional criteria (i.e. water quality/quantity, cost efficiency), sanitation services.
decision-making now needs to include desiderates such as resilience and Past research has addressed water-related topics such as resilience,
sustainable development goals (SDGs). Indeed, the United Nations driving forces for a new paradigm in urban water cycle and SDGs indi­
explicitly recognized access to water and sanitation as human rights and vidually. However, the urban water cycle is a volatile, uncertain, com­
the key role of such access in the realization of other human rights plex and ambiguous (VUCA) system whose management needs a
(United Nations, 2014). Moreover, the 6th Sustainable Development deliberately and socio-technical approach (Makropoulos and Savić,
Goal (SDG) is to “ensure availability and sustainable management of 2019). In this context and, as a first approximation to be developed and
water and sanitation for all” (United Nations, 2021). In turn, a more verified by future studies focused on case studies, we propose a con­
“resilient” water sector (Quitana et al., 2020; Kumar et al., 2020) is one ceptual framework to rethink the urban water cycle (i.e., water and
that is able to safeguard a pertinent state within the socioecological sanitation services, considered as a complex system) and increase its
system to support ecosystems and biomes, to maintain the stability of resilience based on the use of nudges and integrating the pillars for
local weather and climate systems, and to boost the capability of the resilience and the SDGs.
hydrological cycle to ensure a steady water supply for humans, all while Our framework addresses the limitations of previous studies by
protecting the current state of the biosphere and the Earth. Moving to­ considering the whole urban water cycle (i.e., both drinking water and
ward a resilient urban water cycle has been identified as an opportunity wastewater services) and by proposing the use of nudges with various
to tackle urban water challenges by providing a systemic approach to agents of action (citizens, organizations, and governments). The pro­
delivering water supply and sanitation services in a more sustainable, posed framework could be used by decision-makers to facilitate the
inclusive, and efficient way (Howard et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2022). transition to a resilient and sustainable urban water cycle considering
So far, this transformation in the urban water management has been the ongoing transformation of and current challenges posed by urban
addressed from a perspective which privileged technical solutions (Pahl water management.
Wostl, 2015). Thus, considerable advances have been registered in Section 2 of this article introduces the concept of resilience of the
technologies such as reuse of wastewater and grey water or rainwater urban water cycle, presenting the pillars for resilient development that
harvesting, known to improve the resilience and sustainability man­ are aligned with the SDGs and addressing the concept of resilience
agement of urban water systems (Peña-Guzmán et al., 2017). However, through nudges. Section 3 synthesizes previous insights in the applica­
while the technical and economic aspects of this paradigm shift have tion of the concept of resilience to the urban water cycle, both in the
been extensively explored, its socio-cognitive aspects remain largely drinking water system and in the urban wastewater system. Section 4
understudied. The ‘human dimension’ of water management, entailing describes the driving forces, as well as the agents and dimensions
behavioral, political and societal complexities needs to be given involved in the resilience of the urban water cycle. Finally, by applying
enhanced consideration (Pahl Wostl, 2015). the insights from the literature as a whole. Section 5 presents our new
To address this gap, this paper proposes a theoretical framework for conceptual resilience framework for the urban water system.
decision-making in the water sector based on “nudge theory”, first
advanced by the Nobel Prize in behavioral economics Richard H. Thaler 2. Enhancing the resilience in the urban water cycle through
and Cass R. Sunstein (Thaler and Sunstein, 2009). This theory draws on nudges
latest advances in economics, evolutionary psychology, and cognitive
science to propose policies based not on bans and impositions but on The concept of resilience is critical to sustainability research. From
positive reinforcement and indirect suggestions and incentives as ways Holling’s early work and applications to socioecological systems (Hol­
to shape the behavior and decision-making of groups or individuals ling, 1986), including in terms of adaptive management, and Pimm
(Thaler and Sunstein, 2009). In other words, nudges are intended to (1991) efforts to operationalize the concept clearly captures an impor­
persuade people to make better judgments and engage in desirable tant idea: the capacity of systems to resist the impact of forces, conserve
practices while preserving their autonomy. their basic characteristics and, potentially, bounce back. Policies meant
The concept of “nudge”, as employed in this paper, is inspired by the to enhance the resilience of urban socio-natural systems are closely
observation of human behavior in situations when individuals need to linked to the SDGs, including SDG6 on clean water and sanitation for all,
take decisions, especially those that have delayed consequences, are as they provide a roadmap for sustainable urbanization. The SDGs were
challenging, infrequent, and do not give immediate feedback. It also adopted as a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet,
applies to choices for which the connection between experiences and and ensure that by 2030, all people enjoy peace and prosperity. The
consequences is ambiguous. In these cases, people tend to react if 2030 Agenda is a game-changing plan of action for governance, the
“nudged” or encouraged to act in a certain direction. A set of options planet, people, and prosperity (see later), which represent the four pil­
helps in nudging people in the direction of socially acceptable behaviors. lars for resilient development (Chidozie and Oluwatobi, 2017; Fox and
The goal has been to determine how effective voluntary techniques may Stoett, 2016; World Economic Forum, 2022). As a result, there is a
be in influencing positive behavioral change (Shove, 2010). constant focus on data collection and the requirement of consistently
The research on the use of nudges in the urban water cycle is not new monitoring and reporting on SDG indicators to achieve resilience
but, so far, studies have been limited to water conservation goals (see (Hatton et al., 2019).
Section 2). We argue for a more holistic framework to facilitate both Pursuing these goals as a society entails complex policymaking tak­
resilience and the pursuit of SDGs in the water sector: extending and ing into account individual variables – attitudes, values, behaviors - and

2
M. Poch et al. Chemosphere 317 (2023) 137850

collective or governance components. Regarding the latter, climate 3. Applying the concept of resilience to the urban water cycle
change and managing common resources imply action dilemmas that
require cooperation between individuals and communities (Velez and 3.1. Resilience and drinking water
Moros, 2021). The urban water cycle is a VUCA system and therefore,
increasing its resilience also requires cooperation among the stake­ In the drinking water industry, resilience is defined as the ability of a
holders involved in its management (i.e., governments and organiza­ water system to continuously supply water at a quality that meets the
tions) and water users (i.e., citizens). health standards during and after the occurrence of a disastrous event
However, there are several socio-cognitive impediments or biases to (Hatton et al., 2019; Quitana et al., 2020). To be resilient, communities
human cooperation and coordination (Weber, 2017). Drawing on as­ must be viewed as instigators and contributors to resilience efforts at
pects of both psychology and economics, Kahneman and Tversky both the infrastructural and organizational levels (Hatton et al., 2019).
(1979) developed what later became known as behavioral economics Hence, resilience for drinking water supplies need to consider both
and relied on the idea that cognitive biases often prevent people from infrastructure and management decisions taking place at city and
making the best possible (or perfectly rational) decisions. The notion of household level (Charles et al., 2022).
situated or bounded rationality came across as a useful balance for the Previous studies have identified numerous hazards that can threaten
dominant and limiting concept of individual rationality: as humans, we the continuity and quality of supply and thus the resilience of the
take into consideration value frameworks, intersubjective relations, drinking water system. They can have an impact on any of the three
therefore we reason according to our concrete situation (Bendor, components of the urban water system: i) the source of raw water, ii)
2001). In the words of Richard Thaler and Cook et al. (2018), we are drinking water production and iii) drinking water supply (Table 1).
“humans” not “econs”. These biases might be partially overcome by the
presence of intrinsic types of motivation such as nudges (Festré and i) The source of raw water: water resources such as surface water or
Garrouste, 2015). groundwater may be exposed to overutilization, environmental
A nudge is a policy intervention for redirecting an agent’s choices changes affecting quality and quantity and damage to infra­
by very slightly altering their choice conditions (Thaler and Sunstein, structure (due to natural or anthropogenic hazards), among
2009). It contrasts with traditional public policies, which typically rely others (Vega et al., 2018).
on bans, commands or manipulations of choice incentives (Mongin and ii) Drinking water production: physical infrastructure (pumps,
Cozic, 2018). A nudge is any aspect of the choice architecture that pipes, dosing stations) and digital infrastructure may be exposed
alters people’s behavior in a predictable way, without significantly to failures. Treatment may experience quantity failures (loss of
changing their economic incentives (Thaler and Sunstein, 2009). water) or quality failures (unacceptable water quality). Quantity
Hence, nudges could be very useful to increase the resilience of the failures are easier to detect and can be rectified with storage
urban water cycle, as they address concomitantly individual and the tanks, whereas quality failures cannot be rectified and may lead
collective components, driving motivation for desirable environmental to a cessation of water delivery (Rosén et al., 2010).
behaviors. iii) Drinking water supply: demand management is mainly affected
Prior studies evidenced that policies based on nudges can help to by the availability of source water and demographic changes or
implement effective and sustainable strategies in the urban water cycle changes in the usage of water by different actors. Impacts on any
(Miranda et al., 2020; Moglia et al., 2018; Nayar and Kanaka, 2017; component of these subsystems are likely to ultimately affect end
Seger et al., 2019; Tortajada et al., 2019; Yoon et al., 2019). Nudges consumers, who could eventually suffer from water scarcity,
were previously used in urban water systems, mostly to minimize water discontinuity in the water supply and issues related to hydraulic
use (Velez and Moros, 2021). The use of nudges in terms of social in­ conditions and water quality (Cubillo and Martínez-Codina,
centives in Cape Town resulted in an average reduction in water usage 2017).
between 0.6% and 1.3% (Visser et al., 2021). Neighborhood compari­
sons in Costa Rica reduced drinking water by 4.9% relative to the control
group, whereas a planning postcard intervention led to a reduction of
Table 1
4.8% (Miranda et al., 2020). Another study found that after behavioral Potential hazards to the resilience of the drinking water system (proposal based
interventions in hotels, guests reduced their water consumption, even on (Quitana et al., 2020); * See section 4.2 for further details).
though they did not have any monetary incentive to do so (Joo et al.,
Drinking water Resilience Hazards
2018). From a water quality perspective, positive and incremental ef­ subsystem level*
fects could be found from all behavioral nudges applied to promote
Source water Infrastructural Damage to infrastructure (anthropogenic or
water treatment among rural households in Kenya and urban slums in
natural hazards)
Bangladesh (Luoto et al., 2014). In a broader context, the use of nudges Contamination
exerted positive effects from an urban water regulation perspective Climate change – droughts
(Bardelli, 2021). Finally, Yoon et al. proposed introducing policies in the Organizational Conflicts of interest
form of a nudge within a framework of assisting decision-makers in Drinking water Infrastructural Damage to infrastructure (e.g., pumps,
production pipes, wells, dosing devices, digital
selecting the most sustainable wastewater treatment alternative (Yoon infrastructure)
et al., 2019). Contamination
Although nudges have been used in the past, there are scholars who Organizational Cross-dependencies with the chemical
are still skeptical about their effectiveness arguing that people should be industry and power supply (lack of chemical
reagents and power supply)
allowed to make their own decisions, including errors, and learn from
•
them (Hausman and Welch, 2010). Nudges have been criticized for Personnel dependence
being manipulative or coercive (Doorn, 2021; White, 2013) or they tap Drinking water Infrastructural Damage to infrastructure (e.g., pipe breaks)
into decision-making that is not completely autonomous (Bovens, supply leading to water loss or contamination.
2009). Nevertheless, we maintain that a proper operationalization of the Availability of source water reduced by
natural/anthropogenic hazards and not
theory can bypass these ethical concerns for autonomy by designing meeting consumer demand
policies that are transparent and offer opt-out rights (Thaler and Sun­ Organizational Community not engaged in water
stein, 2009). conservation practices
Community Discontinuity of water supply, water
shortages

3
M. Poch et al. Chemosphere 317 (2023) 137850

From a risk management perspective, water utilities need to build a Table 2

resilient supply chain, which not only seeks to reduce risks but also is Hazards to the resilience of the wastewater system (proposal based on Juan-­
prepared to rapidly adjust and recover from any anticipated supply García et al., 2021, 2017), * See section 4.2 for further details).
chain disruptions (Deloitte Global, 2021). From a technical point of Urban wastewater Resilience Detected hazards
view, critical indicators have been used to measure and enhance resil­ subsystem level*
ience of drinking water systems (Xu et al., 2021; Rathnayaka et al., Sewer and Infrastructural Damage to infrastructure (anthropogenic
2022; Martin et al., 2022). Another approach widely used to quantify stormwater or natural hazards, incl. Infrastructure
resilience of urban water systems is the construction and assessment of systems aging)
Equipment (mechanical) failures
resilience curves which illustrate the evolution of water system perfor­
Stormwater impacts (flooding, combined
mance before, during, and after a disruption (Assad et al., 2019; He and sewer overflows)
Yuan, 2019; Poulin and Kane, 2021). Climate change
In addition to technical assessment, community resilience can be Power outages
built at the drinking water supply level to engage citizens in water Changing energy prices, changes in the
electricity production emission factor
conservation practices, reduce water consumption and promote rapid Community Change in the impervious catchment area
responses to hazards. Increasing the understanding of the risks posed to Increasing water use
drinking water systems would help communities in taking actions to Population growth
increase resilience (Hatton et al., 2019). In this sense, the nudges re­ Wastewater Infrastructural Influent variation (stormwater)
treatment plants Overloading (shock load, chemical oxygen
ported in the literature aimed at reducing water consumption (Miranda
demand (COD), nitrogen (N), suspended
et al., 2020; Visser et al., 2021) or sharing resilience information solids (SS))
through bills (Hatton et al., 2019). Damage to infrastructure
Equipment failures
3.2. Resilience and the urban wastewater system Biological operational problems
Power outage
Rising energy prices, changes in the
Regarding the resilience of the wastewater system, a critical review electricity production emission factor
of studies that deal with resilience in the wastewater treatment sector Organizational Stringent legislation (noncompliance)
highlighted the lack of consensus in the definition of resilience and the Community Structural urban changes
Increase in water use
lack of a comprehensive framework for resilience assessment (Juan-­
Population growth
García et al., 2017). The paper recommended connecting resilience Water reclamation Infrastructural Failure of disinfection methods
assessment to broader asset management plans as a means of unlocking plants Production of dibutyl phthalates (DBPs)
investment and handling uncertainty. In turn, a framework showing Change in energy prices, change in the
how threats to a water system can result in consequences for society, the electricity production emission factor
Community Consumer acceptance of reclaimed water
economy and the environment was proposed (Butler et al., 2017). The Receiving media Deterioration of water quality (chemical
same framework was used to evaluate the relationship between the composition and biological pollutants)
reliability, risk and resilience of urban wastewater systems (Sweetapple Changes in water temperature
et al., 2018). In the same vein, a framework for model-based resilience Deterioration in receiving water ecology
assessment was developed (Juan-García et al., 2021).
As in the case of drinking water systems, several indicators and
composite indicators have been proposed and used to evaluate the Table 3
resilience of both sanitation systems and wastewater treatment tech­ What does each driving force enable (proposal based on Garrido-Baserba et al.,
nologies (Guo et al., 2021; Holloway et al., 2021; Chambers et al., 2022; 2020; Sedlak, 2014; Vázquez-Rowe et al., 2017)?
Zhang et al., 2022). Moreover, a non-negligible number of studies Driver What it enables
focused on discussing the relevance of implementing decentralized 4th water New business models
wastewater treatment systems as an alternative to conventional revolution Closure of the urban water cycle
centralized facilities to enhance resilience by increasing redundancy Increase in resilience, including water reuse
(Vázquez-Rowe et al., 2017; Bernal et al., 2021; Pasciucco et al., 2022). Digitalization Ease of reporting data and acquiring data
Open platforms for knowledge sharing
Previous studies have identified hazards that pose risks for waste­
Community engagement through public consultation,
water treatment and reuse and potentially damage receiving media, participatory processes.
thereby threatening the resilience of the wastewater system; these Decentralization Increase in the redundance and interdependence of water
hazards can act at any of the four subsystems of the urban wastewater systems
system: sewer catchment, wastewater treatment plants, water reclama­ Changes in the business model of (traditional) centralized
systems
tion plants, and receiving media (Table 2).
Additional environmental benefits and socioeconomic co-
benefits
4. Factors associated with resilience in the urban water cycle Climate change Increase in awareness – increase in community engagement

4.1. Driving forces of resilience in the urban water cycle

revolution” refers to a change in the way we approach water resource
management, especially in the Global North, by making it more logical
Past research discussing the need of rethink the urban water cycle, i.
and sustainable, for instance via an increased use of techniques such as
e., adopting a new paradigm in the provision of water and sanitation
wastewater reuse, stormwater capture, etc. It provides a tremendous
services, has been expanding over the last decade (Leveque et al., 2021).
untapped possibility for achieving economic and environmental sus­
As a result of a systematic review, in this paper we look at four major
tainability via resilience in the operation, maintenance, and repair of
driving forces, often overlapping, that have an influence on the evolu­
urban water infrastructure (Sedlak, 2014). Our capacity to transform
tion of the urban water cycle, and hence its resilience, as follows: i) the
our urban wastewater, stormwater, and other water sources into a stable
“fourth water revolution”, ii) digitalization, iii) climate change and iv)
and sustainable water supply system should not rely solely on traditional
decentralization (Garrido-Baserba et al., 2020; Nansubuga et al., 2016;
water sources (surface water and groundwater) to meet our water needs.
Poch et al., 2020) (see Table 3 and Table 4).
Innovation activities in the water sector have also been explored in
The “fourth water revolution”: The so called “fourth water

4
M. Poch et al. Chemosphere 317 (2023) 137850

Table 4 and in the dry tropics. Flooding and drought are expected to become
Nudges proposed to agents for resilience practices. more common in many places as the intensity and unpredictability of
Agent Examples of potential nudges (What can extremes of precipitation rise. The amount of water stored in glaciers
accelerate resilience practices?) and the amount of snow on the ground are expected to decrease during
Citizens Personalized information campaign about the real the next century. Water quality will be impacted by higher water tem­
risk of future droughts to nudge customers into peratures and variations in extremes, such as floods and droughts, which
consuming less water. will worsen many types of water pollution. Food availability, stability,
Helping consumers understand the risks access, and use are predicted to be impacted by changes in water
associated with the absence of resilience practices
to increase their willingness to pay for
quantity and quality as a result of climate change. Current water man­
sustainability related services agement systems may not be able to withstand the effects of climate
Installing opt-out smart meters instead of change. Climate change may cause current water management methods
obligatory ones to nudge consumers into willingly to fail (Dickin et al., 2020; Grasham et al., 2021).
adopt water conservation
Governments (regulators, etc) ‘Peer pressure’ platforms for reporting resilience
metrics to nudge regulators into improving 4.2. Agents and dimensions involved in the resilience of the urban water
performance by comparison cycle based on nudges
Financial incentives targeting SDGs
Tax exemption for new constructions
Considering the parties involved in the urban water cycle, we have
implementing decentralized water systems and
circular economy solutions
identified three different sets of agents on whom nudges might act: i)
Public and private Increasing use of digital solutions (e.g., to individuals, ii) organizations and iii) institutions (Table 3). Individual
organizations (water utilities, overcome the challenges posed by the COVID-19 agents are citizens in their role as consumers, utility workers, etc. Col­
etc) outbreak for organizational resilience) lective agents are the public and private organizations that have the
Accessing alternative funding options (e.g., low-
responsibility to provide drinking water and sanitation services (e.g.,
interest loans for water system upgrades,
discounts on property rates) water utilities), and institutional agents include governmental and reg­
ulatory institutions. Several types of factors (in our terminology “di­
mensions”) influence the three types of agents: social, economic,
middle- and low-income countries (Adams et al., 2020; Kydyrbekova cultural, technological, political, healthcare, and environmental. The
et al., 2022) because they are essential to ensure water security. interrelationships between agents and dimensions contribute to the
Digitalization in the water sector: By 2025, between 80% and 50% complexity of the urban water system (Marques et al., 2015; Pinto et al.,
of the water utilities in industrialized counties and developing countries 2017). While each agent is influenced by the described multidimen­
will have undergone some form of digital transformation (Garrido-Ba­ sional factors, the lack of a resilient urban water cycle negatively im­
serba et al., 2020). The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated, at least in pacts on the individual agents. Therefore, although nudges can be
some countries, the digitalization of the water industry (Lawson et al., implemented for these three different types of agents, they have a direct
2022). To monitor the SARS-CoV-2, many authorities have turned to impact on individual behavior.
wastewater-based epidemiology as useful tools for assessing and man­ Notably, from a decision-making perspective, resilience has different
agement the pandemic. However, there are divergent ethical–political meanings for each type of agent. For example, for individual agents,
implications of the deployment of artificial intelligence and Big Data resilience means taking actions in the daily life that contribute to
analytics in urban water management (Popartan et al., 2022). reducing the consumption of water, either for personal use or to avoid
Decentralization and circularity of the water sector: Centralized this resource for technological reasons. For organizations, resilience
municipal water systems face serious challenges such as the need for means implementing a set of policies, processes, and procedures for a
considerable investments in maintaining existing infrastructure or versatile managerial system that could include, for example, the
setting up new one for adequate sanitation in developing countries. As a decentralization of the water sector. For institutional agents, resilience
result, alternative approaches that do not rely upon centralized sewer involves regulatory changes, for example, by providing incentives to use
systems are gaining traction (Rabaey et al., 2020). Decentralized water rainwater and graywater. This difference in what resilience implies for
systems (DWSs) are emerging as a form of resilient, personalized urban each type of agent should be considered when nudges are defined and
water systems that would make it possible to tailor their water con­ implemented to improve the resilience of the urban water cycle.
sumption to their personal preferences (Garrido-Baserba et al., 2022;
Rabaey et al., 2020). DWS are also a strategic approach for circular 5. Integrative conceptual resilience model for the urban water
water management in cities, which can help boost the sustainability and system
thus the overall resilience of the water system (Lu et al., 2019). Circular
water management integrates water reclamation and reuse from This section integrates the main ideas from the previous sections into
wastewater or greywater to decrease pressure on natural water sources. a conceptual framework to better the potential of nudges to act towards
Ideally, not only is the transport and pollution of water minimized, but a resilient urban water cycle (Fig. 1). The SDGs, especially SDG6 on
energy and nutrient recovery are also maximized, and rainwater is clean water and sanitation for all, are connected to improving the
harvested and used locally (Oral et al., 2021). Although many conven­ resilience in the urban water cycle, which is a central issue in both
tional wastewater treatment technologies can be implemented in developed and developing countries. The four pillars for resilience
decentralized settings (Capodaglio and Olsson, 2019), nature-based so­ developed by the 2030 Agenda of the United Nations, namely, people,
lutions (see Langergraber et al., 2020) are emerging as a more sustain­ the planet, governance and prosperity, are essential for advancing the
able alternative to help close the water management loops in cities achievement of the SDGs and, therefore, improving resilience (Chidozie
contributing to the transition to more livable and resilient cities Cas­ and Oluwatobi, 2017; Fox and Stoett, 2016). As noted, in the last several
tellar et al., (2021). years, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic (Garrido-Baserba et al.,
Climate change: Resilience is one of the most important indicators 2020), the urban water industry has been experiencing an evolution
of adaptation to climate change (Sun et al., 2020). As a result of climate driven by four main forces: the fourth water revolution, digitalization,
change and according to the predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel decentralization and climate change. These drivers are changing the
on Climate Change (IPCC), annual average river flow and water avail­ way consumers, water utilities and regulators approach the new chal­
ability are expected to increase at high latitudes and in tropical habitats lenges posed by the urban water cycle, including its resilience against
by the middle of the twenty-first century but decrease at mid-latitudes both anthropogenic and natural hazards. With this framework, we

5
M. Poch et al. Chemosphere 317 (2023) 137850

In line with this holistic and interdisciplinary conception of the

urban water cycle, this paper proposed a theoretical-conceptual frame­
work based on the theory of nudges. Previous experiences with the use
of nudges in the context of the urban water cycle have revealed their
potential role in influencing the behavior of people, mainly about
reducing drinking water consumption. This study integrates structures
of decision (agents), pillars of resilience (social and governance issues)
and driving forces (technology and water itself) and therefore, it could
be considered an integrative framework for increasing resilience in the
urban water cycle based on a hydrosocial cycle approach.
According to the proposed conceptual framework, research on
nudges for the resilience in the urban water cycle should be further
explored based on real or simulated case studies. The results of such
empirical applications will be useful for feedback and adjust the con­
ceptual framework proposed. We emphasize the need of integrating the
three levels of agents, i.e., governments, organizations and citizens in
decision-making related to urban water cycle resilience. Water utilities
are responsible of providing drinking water and wastewater services.
They are regulated and monitored by governments (water regulators
and agencies). Moreover, the citizens as water users play a relevant role
in resilience achievement. If resilience is assessed from only one of these
Fig. 1. An integrative conceptual framework of resilience in the urban
water system.
perspectives, it is an incomplete assessment because the three agents and
their decisions are interconnected. Hence, we encourage policy makers
and researchers to assess resilience from a holistic and integrative point
propose extending the use of nudges to all stages of the urban water
of view because the urban water cycle is a VUCA system.
cycle, i.e., drinking water and wastewater services, and to three types of
agents of action (citizens, governments and other public and private
Author contributions statement
agents in the water sector) that might influence the decision-making
process at different scales and levels to improve the resilience of the
Manel Poch: Conceptualization, Resources, Writing-Original Draft,
urban water cycle. In the framework, we also portray the agents inter­
Supervision; Carolina Aldao: Literature Review, Methodology, Writing-
acting in the implementation of nudges considering that resilience might
Original Draft, Formal Analysis; Lluis Godo-Pla: Investigation, Literature
be understood differently for each of them.
Review, Writing-Original Draft; Hèctor Monclús: Investigation, Meth­
We emphasize that these agents do not act in isolation; rather, they
odology, Formal Analysis; Lucia Alexandra Popartan: Investigation,
are influenced by a common set of dimensions (social, economic, cul­
Methodology, Formal analysis, Review and Editing; Joaquim Comas:
tural, technological, political, healthcare, and environmental di­
Literature review, Methodology, Formal analysis; Manuel Cermerón-
mensions) that should also be analyzed and considered before defining
Romero: Validation, Review and Editing; Sebastià Puig: Investigation,
and implementing nudges for enhancing the resilience of the urban
Methodology, Formal analysis, Review and Editing; María Molinos-
water cycle. Therefore, the integrative framework has been proposed,
Senante: Conceptualization, Writing-Original draft, Review and Edit­
bearing in mind the multidimensional factors that influence each agent.
ing, Supervision.
The impacts on the three types of agents are distributed across the four
pillars of the resilience cycle.
Declaration of competing interest
An example of the interconnection between the driving forces of
resilience and agents involved is the impact of climate change. It has
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
accentuated the occurrence and magnitude of droughts (Cook et al.,
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
2018) which has promoted: i) the adoption of national and international
the work reported in this paper.
laws by governments to regulate water reuse; ii) the use of alternative
water sources by organizations for providing drinking water and; iii) the
Data availability
improvement of the acceptability of water reuse by citizens (Glick et al.,
2019). Decentralization of urban water systems is another example of
No data was used for the research described in the article.
the potential impact of the driving forces for resilience and its integra­
tion with the three levels of agents. Because most of the urban water and
Acknowledgments
sanitation infrastructure is already built, decentralization will hardly be
adopted spontaneously. In contrast, governments could use nudges to
This research was carried out in the project “RITA – urban cycle
incentive both water utilities (organizations) and citizens to adopt
ResIlient To pAndemics) funded by AGAUR (ref. 2020PANDE00176).
decentralization approaches.
María Molinos-Senante thanks to Research Center for the Integrated
Management of Natural Disasters (CIGIDEN), ANID/FONDAP/
6. Conclusions
15110017. Hèctor Monclús acknowledges Agencia Estatal de Inves­
tigación of the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities
Water management is not merely a technical field but a socio-
(MCIU) for partially funding this research through the Ramon y Cajal
political one that involves human values, behavior and organization
Research Fellowship (RYC2019-026434-I/AEI/10.13039/501.100.011.
(Linton and Budds, 2014). In this context, the “hydrosocial cycle” has
033). Lucia Alexandra Popartan acknowledges the Agencia Estatal de
been widely used to refer to the inseparable social and physical di­
Investigación del Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Spain, for funding
mensions of water (McCulligh et al., 2020; Laituri, 2020). According to
this research through the fellowship Juan de la Cierva Formación
Linton and Budds (2014), the hydrosocial cycle “relates a variety of
(FJC2021-047857-I). Sebastià Puig is a Serra Hunter Fellow (UdG-AG-
heterogeneous entities including social power and structures of gover­
575) and acknowledges the funding from the ICREA Academia award.
nance, technologies, infrastructure, political policies, and water itself”.
LEQUIA and ICRA have been recognized as “consolidated research

6
M. Poch et al. Chemosphere 317 (2023) 137850

groups” (Refs 2021 SGR01352 and 2021 SGR 01283) by the Catalan He, X., Yuan, Y., 2019. A framework of identifying critical water distribution pipelines
from recovery resilience. Water Resour. Manag. 33 (11), 3691–3706. https://doi.
Ministry of Research and Universities.
org/10.1007/s11269-019-02328-2.
Holling, C.S., 1986. Resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: local surprise and global change.
References In: Clark, W.C., Munn, R.E. (Eds.), Sustainable Development of the Biosphere.
Cambridge University Press.
Adams, E.A., Zulu, L., Ouellette-Kray, Q., 2020. Community water governance for urban Holloway, T.G., Williams, J.B., Ouelhadj, D., Yang, G., 2021. Dynamic resilience for
water security in the Global South: status, lessons, and prospects. Wiley biological wastewater treatment processes: interpreting data for process
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water 7 (5). https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1466 art. no. management and the potential for knowledge discovery. J. Water Proc. Eng. 42,
e1466. 102170 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102170.
Assad, A., Moselhi, O., Zayed, T., 2019. A new metric for assessing resilience of water Howard, G., Nijhawan, A., Flint, A., Baidya, M., Pregnolato, M., Ghimire, A., Poudel, M.,
distribution networks. Water (Switzerland) 11 (8), 1701. https://doi.org/10.3390/ Lo, E., Sharma, S., Mengustu, B., Ayele, D.M., Geremew, A., Wondim, T., 2021. The
w11081701. how tough is WASH framework for assessing the climate resilience of water and
Bardelli, L., 2021. Economics and choice architecture: what can be learnt from water sanitation. npj Clean Water 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41545-021-00130-5,
regulation in Italy. Industria 42, 241–273. https://doi.org/10.1430/99919. 2021 41 4.
Bendor, J., 2001. Bounded Rationality, vol. 1303. International Encyclopedia of the Joo, H.H., Lee, J., Park, S., 2018. Every drop counts: a water conservation experiment
Social & Behavioral Sciences, p. 1307. with hotel guests. Econ. Inq. 56, 1788–1808. https://doi.org/10.1111/ECIN.12563.
Bernal, D., Restrepo, I., Grueso-Casquete, S., 2021. Key criteria for considering Juan-García, P., Butler, D., Comas, J., Darch, G., Sweetapple, C., Thornton, A.,
decentralization in municipal wastewater management. Heliyon 7 (3), e06375. Corominas, L., 2017. Resilience theory incorporated into urban wastewater systems
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06375. management. State of the art. Water Res. 115, 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
Bovens, L., 2009. The Ethics of Nudge, Preference Change. Springer, Dordrecht. https:// WATRES.2017.02.047.
doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2593-7_10. Juan-García, P., Rieger, L., Darch, G., Schraa, O., Corominas, L., 2021. A framework for
Butler, D., Ward, S., Sweetapple, C., Astaraie-Imani, M., Diao, K., Farmani, R., Fu, G., model-based assessment of resilience in water resource recovery facilities against
2017. Reliable, resilient and sustainable water management: the Safe & SuRe power outage. Water Res. 202, 117459 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
approach. Glob. Challenges 1, 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/GCH2.1010. WATRES.2021.117459.
Capodaglio, A.G., Olsson, G., 2019. Energy issues in sustainable urban wastewater Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., 1979. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk.
management: use, demand reduction and recovery in the urban water cycle, 2020 Econometrica 47 (2), 263–291.
Sustain. Times 12, 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12010266. Page 266 12. Kumar, M., Munoz-Arriola, F., Furumai, H., Chaminda, T., 2020. Resilience, Response,
Castellar, J.A.C., Popartan, L.A., Pueyo-Ros, J., Atanasova, N., Langergraber, G., and Risk in Water Systems. Shifting Management and Natural Forcings Paradigms.
Säumel, I., Corominas, L., Comas, J., Acuña, V., 2021. Nature-based solutions in the Springer, Berlin.
urban context: terminology, classification and scoring for urban challenges and Kydyrbekova, A., Meiramkulova, K., Tolysbayev, B., Kydyrbekova, A., 2022. Dynamics of
ecosystem services. Sci. Total Environ. 77920. Article number 146237. innovation in the use of water resources in emerging markets. International Journal
Chambers, K.G., Sheridan, P.M., Cook, S.M., 2022. Sanitation criteria: a comprehensive of Innovation Studies 6 (3), 142–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijis.2022.05.002.
review of existing sustainability and resilience evaluation criteria for sanitation Laituri, M., 2020. The hydrosocial cycle in rapidly urbanizing watersheds. Front. Earth
systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 9 (7), 583–591. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs. Sci. 14 (2), 256–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-020-0823-3.
estlett.2c00267. Langergraber, G., Pucher, B., Simperler, L., Kisser, J., Katsou, E., Buehler, D.,
Charles, K.J., Howard, G., Villalobos Prats, E., Thomas, J.M., Campbell-Lendrum, D., Carmen, M., Mateo, G., Atanasova, N., 2020. Implementing nature-based solutions
2022. Infrastructure alone cannot ensure resilience to weather events in drinking for creating a resourceful circular city. Blue-Green Syst. 2, 173–185. https://doi.org/
water supplies. Sci. Total Environ. 813, 151876 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 10.2166/BGS.2020.933.
scitotenv.2021.151876. Larsen, T.A., Hoffmann, S., Lüthi, C., Truffer, B., Maurer, M., 2016. Emerging solutions to
Chidozie, F., Oluwatobi, O., 2017. International organizations and global governance the water challenges of an urbanizing world. Science 352, 928–933. https://doi.org/
Agenda: SDGs as a paragon | chidoz. Acta Univ. Danubius, Relat. 10, 43–60. 10.1126/SCIENCE.AAD8641.
Cook, B.I., Mankin, J.S., Anchukaitis, K.J., 2018. Climate change and drought: from past Lawson, E., Bunney, S., Cotterill, S., Farmani, R., Melville-Shreeve, P., Butler, D., 2022.
to future. Curr. Clim. Change Rep. 4 (2), 164–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641- COVID-19 and the UK water sector: exploring organizational responses through a
018-0093-2. resilience framework. Water Environ. J. 36 (1), 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/
Cubillo, F., Martínez-Codina, Á., 2017. A metric approach to measure resilience in water wej.12737.
supply systems, 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/23249676.2017.1355758 7. Leveque, B., Burnet, J.-B., Dorner, S., Bichai, F., 2021. Impact of climate change on the
https://doi.org/10.1080/23249676.2017.1355758. vulnerability of drinking water intakes in a northern region. Sustain. Cities Soc. 66,
Dickin, S., Bayoumi, M., Giné, R., Andersson, K., Jiménez, A., 2020. Sustainable 102656 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102656.
sanitation and gaps in global climate policy and financing, 2020 npj Clean Water 31 Linton, J., Budds, J., 2014. The hydrosocial cycle: defining and mobilizing a relational-
3, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41545-020-0072-8. dialectical approach to water. Geoforum 57, 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Doorn, N., 2021. Artificial intelligence in the water domain: opportunities for responsible geoforum.2013.10.008.
use. Sci. Total Environ. 755, 142561 https://doi.org/10.1016/J. Liu, S.K., Lin, Z.E., Chiueh, P. Te, 2022. Improving urban sustainability and resilience
SCITOTENV.2020.142561. with the optimal arrangement of water-energy-food related practices. Sci. Total
Festré, A., Garrouste, P., 2015. Theory and evidence in psychology and economics about Environ. 812, 152559 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2021.152559.
motivation crowding out: a possible convergence? J. Econ. Surv. 29 (2), 339–356. Lu, Z., Mo, W., Dilkina, B., Gardner, K., Stang, S., Huang, J.C., Foreman, M.C., 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12059. Decentralized water collection systems for households and communities: household
Fox, O., Stoett, P., 2016. Citizen participation in the UN sustainable development goals preferences in Atlanta and Boston. Water Res. 167, 115134 https://doi.org/
consultation process: toward global democratic governance? Glob. Gov. A Rev. 10.1016/J.WATRES.2019.115134.
Multilater. Int. Organ. 22, 555–573. https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02204007. Luoto, J., Levine, D., Albert, J., Luby, S., 2014. Nudging to use: achieving safe water
Garrido-Baserba, M., Corominas, L., Cortés, U., Rosso, D., Poch, M., 2020. The fourth- behaviors in Kenya and Bangladesh. J. Dev. Econ. 110, 13–21. https://doi.org/
revolution in the water sector encounters the digital revolution. Environ. Sci. 10.1016/J.JDEVECO.2014.02.010.
Technol. 54, 4698–4705. https://doi.org/10.1021/ACS.EST.9B04251/ASSET/ Makropoulos, C., Savić, D.A., 2019. Urban hydroinformatics: past, present and future.
IMAGES/MEDIUM/ES9B04251_0003 (GIF). Water 11 (10), 1959. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11101959.
Garrido-Baserba, M., Barnosell, I., Molinos-Senante, M., Sedlak, D.L., Rabaey, K., Marques, R.C., da Cruz, N.F., Pires, J., 2015. Measuring the sustainability of urban water
Schraa, O., Verdaguer, M., Rosso, D., Poch, M., 2022. The third route: a techno- services. Environ. Sci. Pol. 54, 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
economic evaluation of extreme water and wastewater decentralization. Water Res. ENVSCI.2015.07.003.
218, 118408 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2022.118408. Martin, S., Erdlenbruch, K., Alvarez, I., Huet, S., Smadi, C., 2022. Viability,efficiency,
Glick, D.M., Goldfarb, J.L., Heiger-Bernays, W., Kriner, D.L., 2019. Public knowledge, resilience and equity: using very diverse indicators to deal with uncertainties of
contaminant concerns, and support for recycled Water in the United States. Resour. future events. Environ. Sci. Pol. 138, 56–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Conserv. Recycl. 150, 104419 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104419. envsci.2022.09.011.
Global, Deloitte, 2021. Managing Supply Chain Risk and Disruption: COVID-19. McCulligh, C., Arellano-García, L., Casas-Beltrán, D., 2020. Unsafe waters: the
Grasham, C.F., Calow, R., Casey, V., Charles, K.J., de Wit, S., Dyer, E., Fullwood- hydrosocial cycle of drinking water in Western Mexico. Local Environ. 25 (8),
Thomas, J., Hirons, M., Hope, R., Hoque, S.F., Jepson, W., Korzenevica, M., 576–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2020.1805598.
Murphy, R., Plastow, J., Ross, I., Ruiz-Apilánez, I., Schipper, E.L.F., Trevor, J., Miranda, J.J., Datta, S., Zoratto, L., 2020. Saving water with a nudge (or two): evidence
Walmsley, N., Zaidi, H., 2021. Engaging with the politics of climate resilience from Costa Rica on the effectiveness and limits of low-cost behavioral interventions
towards clean water and sanitation for all. npj Clean Water 41 4, 1–4. https://doi. on water use. World bank econ. Rev. 34, 444–463. https://doi.org/10.1093/WBER/
org/10.1038/s41545-021-00133-2, 2021. LHY025.
Guo, D., Shan, M., Owusu, E.K., 2021. Resilience assessment frameworks of critical Moglia, M., Cook, S., Tapsuwan, S., 2018. Promoting water conservation: where to from
infrastructures: state-of-the-art review. Buildings 11 (10), 464. https://doi.org/ here? Water 10, 1510. https://doi.org/10.3390/W10111510, 2018.
10.3390/buildings11100464. Mongin, P., Cozic, M., 2018. Rethinking nudge: not one but three concepts. Behavioural
Hatton, T., Kay, E., Naderpajouh, N., Aldrich, D., 2019. Resilience Shift Primer: Potable Public Policy 2 (1), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2016.16.
Water. An Industry Guide to Enhancing Resilience - the Resilience Shift. Nansubuga, I., Banadda, N., Verstraete, W., Rabaey, K., 2016. A review of sustainable
Hausman, D.M., Welch, B., 2010. Debate: to nudge or not to nudge. J. Polit. Philos. 18, sanitation systems in Africa. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 15, 465–478. https://doi.
123–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-9760.2009.00351.X. org/10.1007/S11157-016-9400-3.

7
M. Poch et al. Chemosphere 317 (2023) 137850

Nayar, A., Kanaka, S., 2017. Nudging urban water conservation: evidence from India on Shove, E., 2010. Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change.
the effect of behavior economics on water consumption. Eur. J. Res. Soc. Sci. 5. https://doi.org/10.1068/A42282.
Oral, H.V., Radinja, M., Rizzo, A., Kearney, K., Andersen, T.R., Krzeminski, P., Sun, Y., Garrido-Baserba, M., Molinos-Senante, M., Donikian, N.A., Poch, M., Rosso, D.,
Buttiglieri, G., Ayral-Cinar, D., Comas, J., Gajewska, M., Hartl, M., Finger, D.C., 2020. A composite indicator approach to assess the sustainability and resilience of
Kazak, J.K., Mattila, H., Vieira, P., Piro, P., Palermo, S.A., Turco, M., Pirouz, B., wastewater management alternatives. Sci. Total Environ. 725, 138286 https://doi.
Stefanakis, A., Regelsberger, M., Ursino, N., Carvalho, P.N., 2021. Management of org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2020.138286.
urban waters with nature-based solutions in circular cities—exemplified through Sweetapple, C., Astaraie-Imani, M., Butler, D., 2018. Design and operation of urban
seven urban circularity challenges. Water 2021 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/ wastewater systems considering reliability, risk and resilience. Water Res. 147, 1–12.
W13233334, 3334 13, 3334. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2018.09.032.
Pasciucco, F., Pecorini, I., Iannelli, R., 2022. Planning the centralization level in Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C., 2009. Nudge. Penguin Books, New York.
wastewater collection and treatment: a review of assessment methods. J. Clean. Tortajada, C., 2020. Contributions of recycled wastewater to clean water and sanitation
Prod. 375, 134092 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134092. Sustainable Development Goals. npj Clean Water 2020 31 3, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.
Peña-Guzmán, C.A., Melgarejo, J., Lopez-Ortiz, I., Mesa, D.J., 2017. Simulation of 1038/s41545-020-0069-3.
infrastructure options for urban water management in two urban catchments in Tortajada, C., González-Gómez, F., Biswas, A.K., Buurman, J., 2019. Water demand
bogotá, Colombia, 2017 Water 9, 858. https://doi.org/10.3390/W9110858. Page management strategies for water-scarce cities: the case of Spain. Sustain. Cities Soc.
858 9. 45, 649–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCS.2018.11.044.
Pimm, S.L., 1991. The Balance of Nature? Ecological Issues in the Conservation of United Nations, 2014. Human Right to Water and Sanitation | International Decade for
Species and Communities. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Action “Water for Life” 2005-2015 [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.un.or
Pinto, F.S., Simões, P., Marques, R.C., 2017. Raising the bar: the role of governance in g/waterforlifedecade/human_right_to_water.shtml. accessed 5.5.22.
performance assessments. Util. Pol. 49, 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/J. United Nations, 2021. Goal 6: Clean water and sanitation - The Global Goals [WWW
JUP.2017.09.001. Document]. URL. https://www.globalgoals.org/goals/6-clean-water-and-sanitation/
Poch, M., Garrido-Baserba, M., Corominas, L., Perelló-Moragues, A., Monclús, H., . accessed 5.5.22.
Cermerón-Romero, M., Melitas, N., Jiang, S.C., Rosso, D., 2020. When the fourth Vázquez-Rowe, I., Kahhat, R., Lorenzo-Toja, Y., 2017. Natural disasters and climate
water and digital revolution encountered COVID-19. Sci. Total Environ. 744, 140980 change call for the urgent decentralization of urban water systems. Sci. Total
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2020.140980. Environ. 605–606, 246–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2017.06.222.
Popartan, L.A., Cortés, À., Garrido-Baserba, M., Verdaguer, M., Poch, M., Gibert, K., Vega, A.S., Lizama, K., Pastén, P.A., 2018. Water quality: trends and challenges. Glob.
2022. The digital revolution in the urban water cycle and its ethical–political Issues Water Policy 21, 25–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76702-4_3.
implications: a critical perspective. Appl. Sci. 12 (5), 2511. https://doi.org/10.3390/ Velez, M.A., Moros, L., 2021. Have behavioral sciences delivered on their promise to
app12052511. influence environmental policy and conservation practice? Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci.
Poulin, C., Kane, M.B., 2021. Infrastructure resilience curves: performance measures and 42, 132–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COBEHA.2021.06.008.
summary metrics. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 216, 107926 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Visser, M., Booysen, M.J., Brühl, J.M., Berger, K.J., 2021. Saving water at Cape Town
ress.2021.107926. schools by using smart metering and behavioral change. Water Resour. Econ 34,
Quitana, G., Molinos-Senante, M., Chamorro, A., 2020. Resilience of critical 100175. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WRE.2020.100175.
infrastructure to natural hazards: a review focused on drinking water systems. Int. J. Weber, E.U., 2017. Breaking cognitive barriers to a sustainable future. Nat. Human
Disaster Risk Reduc. 48, 101575 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJDRR.2020.101575. Behav. 1 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0013, 0013.
Rabaey, K., Vandekerckhove, T., de Walle, A. Van, Sedlak, D.L., 2020. The third route: White, M.D., 2013. The manipulation of choice: ethics and libertarian paternalism.
using extreme decentralization to create resilient urban water systems. Water Res. Manip. Choice Ethics Libert. Paternalism 1–185. https://doi.org/10.1057/97811
185, 116276 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2020.116276. 37313577.
Rathnayaka, B., Siriwardana, C., Robert, D., Amaratunga, D., Setunge, S., 2022. World Economic Forum, 2022. The Global Risks Report 2022, seventeenth ed.
Improving the resilience of critical infrastructures: evidence-based insights from a Wostl, Pahl, 2015. Water Governance in the Face of Global Change. From Understanding
systematic literature review. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 78, 103123 https://doi.org/ to Transformation. Springer, Switzerland.
10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103123. Xu, W., Cong, J., Proverbs, D., Zhang, L., 2021. An evaluation of urban resilience to
Rosén, L., Lindhe, A., Bergstedt, O., Norberg, T., Pettersson, T.J.R., 2010. Comparing flooding. Water (Switzerland) 13 (15), 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13152022.
risk-reduction measures to reach water safety targets using an integrated fault tree Yoon, S., Naderpajouh, N., Hastak, M., 2019. Decision model to integrate community
model. Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 10, 428–436. https://doi.org/10.2166/ preferences and nudges into the selection of alternatives in infrastructure
WS.2010.089. development. J. Clean. Prod. 228, 1413–1424. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
Sedlak, D.L., 2014. Water 4.0 : the Past, Present, and Future of the World’s Most Vital JCLEPRO.2019.04.243.
Resource. Zhang, C., Oh, J., Park, K., 2022. Evaluation of sewer network resilience index under the
Seger, C., Bogelein, S., Meleady, R., Lede, E., Sexton, N., Brown, A., Castelvecchi, S., perspective of ground collapse prevention. Water Sci. Technol. 85 (1), 188–205.
Davies, W., Barnett, P., 2019. Turn off the Tap: behavioural messages increase water https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2021.503.
efficiency during toothbrushing - UEA Digital Repository. Inst. Water J. 3, 42–47.