Shared cultural norms for justice in water institutions: results from Fiji, Ecuador, Paraguay, New Zealand, and the U.S.

It is widely agreed that current institutions are insufficient to meet global water challenges, and extensive institutional reforms are needed. To achieve effective local water management, institutional rules should be congruent with local cultural norms. Conversely, a major potential challenge is posed by tensions between institutional rules and local cultural norms for justice. We propose and demonstrate a new approach to cross-cultural analysis designed to investigate this tension, which can assess when local cultural norms are likely to facilitate or impede the acceptance of specific institutional rules. Using data from 238 respondents in five global sites (in Fiji, Ecuador, Paraguay, New Zealand, and the U.S.) analyzed using cultural consensus analysis, we find evidence of culturally-shared norms of justice in water institutions in at least six domains: a human right to water, water governance, water access, environmental stewardship, aspects of water markets, and aspects of water quality and health. Additionally, local cultural models across sites differed on only two topics: (1) ownership and allocation and (2) restrictions and enforcement. Indigenous heritage is the best single predictor of views on controversial institutional rules dealing with water restrictions/enforcement and ownership/allocation. This approach can help build effective water management solutions by identifying cases in which specific institutional reforms are congruent with local cultural norms (or not), and when those will matter most.

Climate Change as an Involuntary Exposure: A Comparative Risk Perception Study from Six Countries across the Global Development Gradient.

Climate change has been referred to as an involuntary exposure, meaning people do not voluntarily put themselves at risk for climate-related ill health or reduced standard of living. The purpose of this study is to examine people's risk perceptions and related beliefs regarding (1) the likelihood of different risks occurring at different times and places and (2) collective (government) responsibility and personal efficacy in dealing with climate change, as well as (3) explore the ways in which climate risk may be amplified when posed against individual health and well-being. Previous research on this topic has largely focused on one community or one nation state, and so a unique characteristic of this study is the comparison between six different city (country) sites by their development and national wealth. Here, we collected 401 surveys from Phoenix (USA), Brisbane (Australia), Wellington (New Zealand), Shanghai (China), Viti Levu (Fiji), and Mexico City (Mexico). Results suggest that the hyperopia effect characterized the sample from each study site but was more pronounced in developed sites, suggesting that the more developed sites employ a broader perspective when approaching ways to mitigate their risk against climate-related health and well-being impacts.