Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Hydrology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol

Research papers

Effects of extreme drought and water scarcity on consumer behaviour – The

impact of water consumption awareness and Consumers’ choices
Sofia Veloso , Carlos Tam * , Tiago Oliveira
Universidade Nova de Lisboa, NOVA Information Management School (NOVAIMS), Portugal

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

Keywords: Unsustainable changes to Earth’s ecosystems and human activities are intensifying global hydrographic pressure.
Extreme drought This study explores the connection between extreme drought, water scarcity, and consumer behaviour, inves­
Water scarcity tigating the potential psychological impact of these two natural hazards on individuals’ consumption behaviour.
Water consumption
Using an integrated model grounded in the theory of interpersonal behaviour, we surveyed through an online
Water footprint
questionnaire 244 respondents in Portugal, a region regularly affected by extreme drought. The findings reveal
Consumer behaviour
Climate change that affect, perceived consequences, habits, and water scarcity positively influence the intention to engage in
water-saving consumption behaviour. However, this intention does not translate into actual behaviour since no
positive influence is verified. In contrast, both extreme drought and water scarcity have a positive impact on
behaviour, reflecting the urgency to conserve and use water efficiently. These results have theoretical and
practical implications for promoting water-saving actions.

1. Introduction efficient and impartial method to gauge socioeconomic drought

(Edwards et al., 2015). Drought already indirectly affects 40 % of the
Since the Industrial Revolution human activities have caused un­ world’s population (World Health Organization (WHO), n.d.) and
precedented and unsustainable changes to Earth. The growing global directly affects approximately 55 million people annually (Tsegai et al.,
population, economic expansion, and demographic and lifestyle 2022).
changes, led to an intensifying demand for natural resources, making In many regions this hazard together with water stress is becoming
these progressively insufficient to meet demand, posing an urgent global more frequent as is the uncertainty surrounding water supply. Water
challenge and a crucial security threat in the 21st century, by fuelling scarcity affects over 2.3 billion people, where 160 million children are
conflicts over limited resources, triggering food and economic crises, endangered by severe and prolonged droughts (Tsegai et al., 2022). 1.42
encouraging migration, and contributing to political instability, that billion people reside in areas of high or extremely high vulnerability
demands urgent attention (D. Gu et al., 2020). (UNICEF, 2021), and roughly two-thirds of the global population
Simultaneously, severe natural disasters and consequences related to experience acute water shortage in at least one month annually
Global Climate Change (GCC) and weather patterns’ alterations have (Mekonnen & Hoekstra, 2016).
become increasingly frequent. Scientists believe these are mainly caused Droughts, considered to be one of the costliest natural disasters,
by human activities including the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, impacting a variety of sectors (Esfahanian et al., 2017), are expected to
increasing livestock farming, and the use of fertilizers, all of which are become common by 2050. While drought consequences may sometimes
causing Global Warming. The unprecedented intensity of human activ­ be hard to perceive as an individual, due to their gradual onset, their
ities is profoundly changing the state of natural water systems (J. Gu invisible effects, and the complex nature of ecosystems, these have a
et al., 2021), increasing hydrographic pressure. Tangible evidence of strong impact on certain locations and involve several physical and so­
that is drought, an extended dry period with a lack of precipitation, that cial aspects, affecting society’s well-being and economic stability
leads to water scarcity, that can be measured by rainfall shortage (that (Edwards et al., 2019).
may lead to drought and, simultaneously, is an explanation for it) and/ As stated by Cook et al. (2016), the extent of drought risks is not
or by people’s perceptions of drought in their residential area, a very evenly distributed, economically or geographically. Economically,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: carlosvai@novaims.unl.pt (C. Tam).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131574
Received 20 October 2023; Received in revised form 23 May 2024; Accepted 8 June 2024
Available online 27 June 2024
0022-1694/© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

drought consequences are typically more severe in developing nations, environmental management, demonstrating companies’ commitment to
as they heavily rely on natural resources and have limited capacity to social responsibility and suggesting a sustainable maximum to the
manage climatic variations. Geographically, regions such as Southern consumption of a resource, simultaneously measuring its availability
Africa, the Mediterranean basin, Central Asia, and Central North and what is already consumed. According to Hoekstra & Wiedmann
America are experiencing a risk of up to five times higher than the rest of (2014), the EF is currently unsustainable, and it is expected to rise, due
the world (Tabari et al., 2021), increasing the vulnerability of its pop­ to the worsening of climate conditions and the overall impact of human
ulation as the warming trend occurs side by side with population activities on the environment that is exceeding Earth’s capacity to
growth, rising migration movements, and even greater water demand support these demands in the long term.
(Linares et al., 2020). The Water Footprint (WF), a component of the EF, focuses on indi­
The Mediterranean Basin, where Portugal is included, currently faces vidual water consumption, promoting awareness, responsible behav­
extremely hot summers, increasingly frequent and severe heat waves, iour, enabling sustainable management and educational programs
and changes in the precipitation pattern. It is a hotspot due to its (Gómez-Llanos et al., 2020). Managing a growing WF, like other EFs,
geographic location and one of the regions more vulnerable to the may involve compromises, as reducing one footprint can increase
impact of GCC. That is why the country is already facing severe changes another. Collaboration among stakeholders is crucial to positively
in its hydrological resources, given that 60.4 % of the territory is in impact all economic sectors, emphasizing the need for international
severe drought and 39.6 % in extreme drought (IPMA, 2022). cooperation and creation or reinforcement of water management pol­
In line with WWF (2021), Portugal has a high level of Water Physical icies (Hoekstra & Wiedmann, 2014).
Risk, which considers both naturally occurring and human-induced Although GCC is global, in developed countries people often over­
conditions within river basins. It comprises four categories: Water look their WF, neglect water conservation, and disregard consumption
Scarcity (high risk), Flooding (medium risk), Water Quality (high risk), due to the reliable and seemingly unlimited water supply. Despite water
and Ecosystem Services Status (almost high risk). The categories scarcity, easy access creates a misleading perception of abundance
mentioned − Water Scarcity, Flooding, Water Quality, and Ecosystem (Koop et al., 2019), leading to inefficient water use, which will then have
Services Status − correspond to the levels of risk assigned to Portugal societal, economic, environmental and health effects (Callejas Mon­
within its river basins, as outlined by WWF (2021). Portugal ranks a caleano et al., 2021). Consumers contradicting the previous pattern have
concerning 198th place in Basin Physical Risk (amongst 251 countries, a minimal effect in consumption reduction (Kelly et al., 2015).
where the territories with the least risk are on the top of the chart). Habitual behaviour, driven by this misperception and selective
The lack of academic literature on this topic results in a substantial attention we previously mentioned, will also reinforce people’s choices
research gap, especially if we specify the Portuguese population. Given and attitudes, contributing to the persistence of certain behaviours even
the significant impact of GCC on extreme droughts worldwide, a in the face of water scarcity (Steg & Vlek, 2009). Despite the possible
research question (RQ) was formulated to explore the potential direct existence of intention-behaviour gap, which is falling short of the
role and influence of individuals in this phenomenon. intention to engage in a behaviour (El Haffar et al., 2020), namely in an
habitual water-saving consumption behaviour that may lessen the
▪ To what extent both the impact of extreme drought and intention toward it since individuals already have developed a routine
awareness of water scarcity influence consumer behaviour? and even if that implies saving water, habit outweighs intention
(Gardner et al., 2020). The truth is that these habitual pro-
The study seeks to understand the psychological impact of Portugal’s environmental behaviours have become integral predictors of eco-
drought on consumer behaviour and explore how proximity to the friendly actions (Laroche et al., 2001), such as purchasing and con­
problem influences perception and potential actions to promote a pos­ sumption choices.
itive impact. It also examines factors affecting water consumption and Emotional dimensions, particularly affective connections to nature
best practices for sustainable water use, such as affect, social factors, and anticipated emotions, play a crucial role in pro-environmental
perceived consequences, habits, intention, water-saving consumption behaviour. Several studies emphasize the impact of emotions like
behaviour, the impact of extreme drought, and awareness of water worry, hope, joy, and anticipated guilt and pride in influencing in­
scarcity, providing insights for improving Portugal’s hydrographic sit­ dividuals’ intentions to engage in environmentally friendly actions
uation and developing strategies for sustainable water consumption. (Carrus et al., 2008; Gifford, 2014; Ojala, 2008).
Water resources, essential for agriculture, sustainability, and envi­ As water scarcity poses an extraordinarily strong and growing chal­
ronmental systems (Akhtar et al., 2021), are affected by factors like GCC, lenge, water-saving measures and conservation are important when
agricultural practices, and urban waste (Nagaraju et al., 2016). managing water resources. People’s perception will also increase when
Behaviour inefficiencies (influenced by socioeconomic, institutional, experiencing hot and dry days and their concerns with GCC, revealing
and environmental factors) (Callejas Moncaleano et al., 2021), and the role of personal experience with elevated temperatures, extreme
psychological factors (e.g. risk perception, norms, or attitudes), have not heat, droughts, and global warming (Marlon et al., 2021). Sometimes
been properly assessed in their influence on water use, leading to risks in people’s insufficient awareness of the severity of water scarcity em­
water quality, availability, and biological characteristics, posing risks to phasizes the importance of understanding individuals’ backgrounds,
both human health and biodiversity (AghaKouchak et al., 2016; Akhtar experiences, perceptions, attitudes, and values to address the problem
et al., 2021; Bell et al., 2018). In short, the direct and indirect effects of and promote behavioural changes (Abbott & Wilson, 2012; Kelly et al.,
this phenomenon will include reduced quality of life, health issues, 2015). Steg (2023) emphasizes the importance of making consumers
unemployment, and increased financial pressure, potentially leading to aware of their impact on the climate. Proving this point, Gilg & Barr
migration, hunger, and poverty (Hallegatte et al., 2017). Those (2006) questioned 1600 UK households and found that if people
depending on water for economic livelihood (e.g. in agriculture) will be consider themselves in danger, they will be more likely to save re­
especially affected (Evans, 2019). However, the consequences extend sources. So, a clear reduction in consumption numbers (in the domestic
beyond specific sectors, causing economic strain with service loss and sphere and agriculture) is seen when experiencing drought and water
job cuts (Edwards et al., 2019). Over the next decade, ensuring that the scarcity but having an environmental attitude alone may not be suffi­
landscape is less susceptible to drought is a top priority (De Jager et al., cient to achieve adequate results. Strategies such as media campaigns, a
2022), as well as taking urgent action to reverse worsening of drought mix of water use limitations, price incentives, and education can be
trends aggravated by climate and detrimental land use practices. effective in increasing water saving during drought periods (Kneebone
The Environmental Footprint (EF) associated with resource con­ et al., 2018). Providing water use feedback in real-time or promptly after
sumption is used as a KPI (Key Performance Indicator) for an action can also be successful, but its effectiveness may depend on the

2
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

context and location (Fielding et al., 2013; Tiefenbeck et al., 2016).

While normative messages may increase concern and intention to act,
they may have weak effects on households already affected by drought
(Schultz et al., 2016).
Understanding decision-making is complex, but behavioural eco­
nomic and psychological theories help provide insight. Our research
confirms that behaviour strongly influences people’s decisions, and even
with measures in place, attitudes, emotions, and habits play a crucial
role in maintaining a pro-environmental and sustainable lifestyle.
Studying theories that explain pro-environmental behaviours pro­
motes their adoption, as highlighted by Pronello and Gaborieau (2018),
supports decision-makers, researchers, and scientists in their drought-
related decisions and studies (Cravens et al., 2021). Fig. 1. Research Model.
Various theories are applied when addressing drought and water
scarcity, including the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991; 2.1. Water saving consumption behaviour
Schrieks et al., 2021), that primarily centres around individual attitudes,
subjective norms, and intentions, perhaps not capturing the interper­ Behaviour, according to TIB, is the actual physical act of doing a
sonal interactions and aspects of behaviour that contribute to sustain­ specific action and is characterized by its duration, intensity, frequency,
able water-related decisions; Social identity theory (SIT) (Turner & and possibility of occurrence. It is affected, partly and directly, by fac­
Tajfel, 1986; Wright et al., 2020), that while provides valuable insights tors like intention and habit (Triandis, 1977). TIB emphasizes the rela­
regarding the influence of social identity and group dynamics on tionship between intention, habit, and eventual behaviour (Bamberg
behavioural intentions, it cannot capture as well interpersonal aspects of et al., 2003; Triandis, 1977). When someone has the intention and the
behaviour, including personal relationships, habit formation, facili­ habit of performing an action, this action takes place (Bamberg &
tating conditions and the emotional dimensions that shape water-related Schmidt, 2003). It is important to distinguish this from habit, which
decisions within households; and protection motivation theory (PMT) involves unconscious processes, such as automatic and repetitive
(Rogers, 1975), although valuable for understanding threat and risk behaviour (Larose et al., 1998). Even with this emphasized difference,
perception and motivation to protect oneself and the community, di­ Fishbein (1967) underscores that behaviour is linked to intentions, as
verges from our focus since our study extends beyond threats and focus individuals typically act based on their intentions.
more in the exploration interpersonal interactions, personal relation­
ships, and habitual patterns that shape sustainable water behaviours.
2.2. Affect
The Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour (TIB) is crucial to our
research due to its insights into decision-making complexities. TIB posits
Affect toward a certain behaviour refers to someone’s emotions
that behaviour is influenced by intention, habit strength, and facilitating
when experiencing it. It is either the positive or negative, the stronger or
conditions (Mumtaz et al., 2022), aligning with our focus on multifac­
weaker emotions that the behaviour provokes (Gagnon et al., 2003).
eted dynamics in water-saving behaviour. TIB recognizes the impact of
Triandis (1977) highlighted the feelings of happiness, euphoria, enjoy­
personal emotions (Webb et al., 2013) and habits, providing valuable
ment, sadness, aversion, dissatisfaction, and animosity. TIB also shows a
insights into the influences on sustainable water management (Hey­
significant connection between a person’s affect regarding behaviour
darian et al., 2020; Taghikhah et al., 2021). This emphasis on personal
and the subsequent intention to carry it out (Limayem et al., 2004). We
and social factors is reinforced by Dissanayake et al. (2022), high­
propose the following:
lighting the importance of these in influencing intentions for behav­
H1: Affect has a positive effect on people’s intentions to perform a
ioural change. Additionally, TIB suggests that behavioural intentions are
water-saving consumption behaviour.
shaped by rational, affective beliefs, and social factors, such as norms,
roles, and self-concept (H. C. Triandis, 1977), highlighting the complex
interplay in attitudes toward effective water management (Kelly et al., 2.3. Social factors
2015). In summary, TIB offers a comprehensive framework that aligns
with the intricacies of decision-making in the context of water-related In TIB, social factors embrace an individual’s assessment of the
behaviours, making it a fitting theoretical lens for our research. cultural and subjective beliefs within their reference group, as well as
This research intends to deepen our understanding of the de­ the agreements they make with others in particular social situations
terminants impacting extreme drought and water scarcity. To accom­ (Woon and Pee, 2004). These factors play a role in behavioural intention
plish this objective, a conceptual framework was constructed drawing (Jackson et al., 2005) since social pressure may influence the likelihood
from TIB (H. C. Triandis, 1977) comprising eight key constructs: affect, of performing a behaviour. Therefore, social factors influence behav­
social factors, perceived consequences, habits, intention, water-saving ioural intentions (Limayem et al., 2004). Based on that, we hypothesize:
consumption behaviour, the impact of extreme drought, and aware­ H2: Social factors have a positive influence on people’s intentions to
ness of water scarcity. perform water-saving consumption behaviour.

2. Research model 2.4. Perceived consequences

The research model depicted in Fig. 1 is founded on TIB and exhibits According to TIB, perceived consequences refers to the probability of
eight constructs, namely affect, social factors, perceived consequences, certain events occurring following a specific behaviour, producing
habits, intention, water-saving consumption behaviour, extreme outcomes that are either positive or negative in value for the individual
drought, and water scarcity. Sociodemographic control variables such as (Woon and Pee, 2004). People attach value to consequences, which is
gender, age, and education were included in the research model, as is why these refer to how well or how bad they would feel if the anticipated
standard in studies on user behaviour (Bernerth & Aguinis, 2016). The consequences happened (Limayem et al., 2004). The connection to
connection between the constructs will be hypothesized to enhance the intention might be that, according to Triandis (1977), potential and
explanatory power of the model. perceived consequences influence someone’s intention to perform a
certain behaviour. Thus, we posit:

3
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

H3: Perceived consequences have a positive influence on people’s concerns, positive attitudes and intentions toward the environment do
intentions to perform a water-saving consumption behaviour. not always translate into actual behaviour, due to low facilitating con­
ditions and external events that interfere (Echegaray & Hansstein, 2017;
2.5. Habits Gonçalves et al., 2020). Intention is influenced by attitudes and context,
particularly in long-term water conservation. Environmental concern
In TIB, habit is described as an automatic and routine behaviour, plays a role in this intention, driving people to act when allowed to
triggered by the environment, and done without self-instruction and reduce water waste and prevent extreme drought and water scarcity
deliberation. A behaviour becomes habitual when performing it is the (Ambaum et al., 2023; Moldovan et al., 2022). However, according to
actual goal and there is no reasoning in what the best thing to do is Sheeran and Abraham (2003), stable intentions usually lead to action,
(Larose et al., 1998). Habit, just like intention, predicts future behaviour and the stronger the motivation the more likely it is that it translates into
effectively (Orbell et al., 2016). When intentions are consistently action (Ajzen, 1991), especially if these are relevant to someone’s
formed, these will most likely cause a repetition of the behaviour. In this identity (Sheeran & Webb, 2016).
way habit becomes a more accurate predictor of behaviour than inten­
tion, as repeated behaviour becomes controlled by habit (Triandis, 3. Methodology
1977). Hence, the subsequent hypotheses are put forth:
H4a: Habits have a positive influence on people’s intentions to 3.1. Measurement
perform a water-saving consumption behaviour.
H4b: Habits have a positive influence on water-saving consumption The survey questions were formulated based on the conceptual
behaviour. model’s constructs (Fig. 1) and adapted from several studies considering
the concerned construct (see Appendix A). The question items were
2.6. Intention Likert Scale questions measured on a seven-point scale (between (1) −
strongly disagree to (7) − strongly agree), in the original scale, with a
Intention, as TIB states, is an individual’s self-directed plan or in­ few exceptions to adapt them to best fit the study’s context. These were
struction to engage in a behaviour (Triandis, 1977). It is the behavioural only administered in Portuguese since the instrument was directed to
intention to perform a specific behaviour and illustrates the willingness Portuguese people or people residing in Portugal.
and effort required to carry out a specific action. Normally, it is linked to The data were collected through a survey – the study’s instrument –
behaviour since it is usually its precise predictor and its antecedent using the platform Qualtrics (https://www.qualtrics.com). The ques­
(Cook et al., 2016; Limayem et al., 2004). A person’s behaviour is a tionnaire was available online and shared on social media (Instagram,
function of the intentions, of habitual responses, and of the circum­ Facebook) and chat channels such as WhatsApp. The sample for this
stances surrounding the situation, according to Triandis (1977). In­ study was drawn through word of mouth (WOM), reaching out to friends
tentions, in turn, are influenced by various factors, including social, and co-workers without specific expertise or experience criteria, who in
affective, and rational ones. Therefore, if a user has a specific purpose to turn, invited others to participate in the survey. This approach allowed
engage in a behaviour, such as water-saving, it may significantly impact us to include individuals without regard to their background, experi­
whether or not the behaviour is carried out. Accordingly, we postulate: ence, or qualifications.
H5: Intention has a positive influence on water-saving consumption
behaviour. 3.2. Data

2.7. Impact of extreme drought To assess the instrument, a pilot test was conducted with 49 re­
spondents, which were excluded from the final sample. With this, we
There are several definitions of extreme drought, but the broader and could assess if questions were easily understandable or if we had any
most used one refers to an extended period with the normal levels of issues that needed to be addressed It also allowed us to make an initial
precipitation being lower than expected, provoking a hydrological observation of the instrument’s reliability and validity. There were
imbalance. Normally the duration considered is one season or more slight adaptations following this initial examination and some of the
resulting in a water deficiency (Extreme Drought Definition | Law In­ question items were refined since they might not be well interpreted.
sider, n.d.), so one brief period of water shortage may lead to an The final survey was active for two weeks between the end of
extended period of water shortage, aggravating the situation. Thus, we February and beginning of March 2023. 374 people started to respond
hypothesize: but only 244 finished, comprising the final sample used for analysis. The
H6: The impact of extreme drought has a positive influence on common method bias was examined using Harman’s one factor test
people’s intention to perform a water-saving consumption behaviour. (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Eigenvalues of the correlation matrix represent
variance explained by principal components/factors. The first eigen­
2.8. Awareness of water scarcity value (the larger one) accounts for only 36 % of the total variance of the
items, and is thus well below the threshold of 50 %, indicating no
Water scarcity is a relative concept indicating an insufficient amount common method bias in our dataset. As an additional test for common
of freshwater that can be accessed physically, due to increased demand, method bias the marker variable technique was employed, and the
lack of or inadequate infrastructures, or limited water supply, to meet calculated variance is 0.030276, which is considered low (Johnson
the peoples’ and environmental necessities. It is a growing problem et al., 2011; Lindell & Whitney, 2001). Therefore, no significant com­
around the world that affects developing communities the most (Bri­ mon method bias was found in the data set. According to the re­
tannica, n.d.; FAO, 2012; UN-Water, n.d.). So, the awareness of water spondents’ characteristics (Table 1), the gender distribution in our
scarcity is when people are conscious of the current difficult situation. sample, with 71 % females and 29 % males, reflects the outcome of the
Therefore, we postulate: recruitment process rather than a deliberate selection bias. Our data
H7: The awareness of water scarcity has a positive influence on collection method relied on snowball sampling using social networks,
people’s intention to perform a water-saving consumption behaviour. which may have led to an overrepresentation of female participants due
As discussed just above, both constructs, “extreme drought” and to the nature of the key informants and their subsequent network con­
“water scarcity”, pose significant challenges, prompting a pressing need nections. While we acknowledge the gender disparity in our sample, it
for action. Therefore, these might have a connection to intention,influ­ was not intentional, but rather a result of the recruitment strategy’s
encing people to act and address these problems. Even with such dynamics. The two main age gaps are above 44 years old (40 %) and

4
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

Table 1 Nevertheless, van Griethuijsen et al., (2015) refer to 0.7 or 0.6 as

Sample characteristics. reference values considered acceptable, also seen in other studies such
Distribution (n = 244) as the one conducted by Šprajc et al. (2019). Convergent validity was
Gender Education assessed using the average variance extracted (AVE), meeting the For­
Male 71 29 % Lower than a bachelor’s degree 41 17 % nell and Larcker (1981) criterion, which is the AVE being above 0.50, so
Female 173 71 % Bachelor 119 49 % that the latent variables can possess significant explanatory capacity, as
Master’s degree or higher 84 34 % they account for over 50 % of the variance in their indicators. Since all of
Age Occupation them are above 0.70, they are statistically significant and, therefore,
36 15 % Employee 182 75 %
indicate convergent validity (Götz et al., 2010), as shown in Table 2.
<25
25–34 79 32 % Self-employed 24 10 %
35–44 32 13 % Student 13 5% Finally, to confirm the discriminant validity of the relationship of
>44 97 40 % Other 10 4% loadings and cross-loadings, the square root of the AVE (also known as
Retired 9 4% the Fornell-Larcker (Fornell & Larcker, 1981)), and the Heterotrait-
Unemployed 6 2%
monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations, were examined (Matsuno
et al., 2005). First examined was the cross-loading criterion, whereby
between 25 and 34 years old (32 %). Regarding the respondents’ edu­ the loadings of each indicator should be higher than cross-loadings (Götz
cation, it is seen that only 17 % have lower than a bachelor’s degree, and et al., 2010; Grégoire and Fisher, 2006). As seen in Table 3, the criterion
more than a third have a master’s degree or higher. Concerning their is met. Constructs AFF1, ED1, ED3, WSCB4, WSCB5, and WSCB6 were
occupation, most respondents, 75 %, are employed, 10 % are self- excluded as they did not meet the criterion. Secondly, the Fornell-
employed, and the remaining 15 % are either student, unemployed, Larcker (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) emphasizes that the square root of
retired, or other. AVEs (Table 2 – bold values displayed in the diagonal) should be higher
than the correlation between all the other constructs (constructs in the
4. Data analysis and results off-diagonal line). This criterion is also met. Thirdly, the Heterotrait-
Monotrait ratio of correlations (Table 4) is below 0.90 (Henseler et al.,
We used partial least squares (PLS), a type of structural equation 2009), providing evidence of discriminant validity.
modelling (SEM) approach, to test our research model and analyse the
data, more specifically SmartPLS 4.0.9.0. 4.2. Structural model and hypothesis
SEM is a complete research approach that combines multiple parts of
the research process. It merges descriptive and explanatory techniques, The path coefficients and t-statistics of the model testing values were
which allows for the modelling of both imperceptible constructs and extracted from R2 bootstrapping, which was based on 5,000 resamples,
cause-effect relationships between them. The measurement model providing support for six of the eight hypotheses. The variance inflation
component of SEM controls for measurement errors in the indicators factor (VIF) ranged between 1.418 e 2.350, indicating that no collin­
used to measure each construct. This is important when measuring un­ earity issues are present, as the interval is lower than 5 (Hair et al., 2017;
observable dimensions. The structural model allows for the simulta­ Hair et al., 2013). Our research model (Fig. 2) explained 60.7 %, of the
neous modelling of multiple independent and dependent variables. variation of intention, supported by affect (H1; ̂ β = 0.117, p < 0.05),
There are two main methods of conducting SEM, one of which is PLS. perceived consequences (H3; ̂ β = 0.357, p < 0.001), habit (H4a; ̂ β =
The PLS method was chosen because it is specifically designed for pre­
0.226, p < 0.001), and water scarcity (H7a; ̂
β = 0.163, p < 0.05). Social
dictive purposes, none of the variables under consideration requires a
factors (H2) and extreme drought (H6), contrary to our expectations, did
normal distribution, and lastly, the research model is perceived as
not support intention. The research model also explained 54.2 % of the
complex (Henseler et al., 2009), making it an appropriate selection. It
variation of water-saving consumption behaviour, which was supported
also requires fewer assumptions about sample sizes and variables than
other covariance-based techniques, which makes it a viable choice for by both habit (H4b; ̂β = 0.508, p < 0.001) and intention (H5; ̂
β = 0.217,
small sample sizes (Chin, 1998), which is the case in the present study. p < 0.05). None of the control variables had a significant effect: age (̂
β=
The evaluation of the hypotheses developed in SEM involves a two-stage -0.005, p > 0.10); education (̂ β = 0.018, p > 0.10); and gender (̂ β =
pre-analysis process, which includes examining both the measurement -0.149, p > 0.10).
model and subsequently the structural model.
5. Discussion
4.1. Measurement model
This study sought to shed light on what influences consumer
The measurement model is evaluated based on internal consistency, behaviour when participants are under conditions of extreme drought
convergent validity, and discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2021). In­ and water scarcity. To accomplish this and draw upon the results of the
ternal consistency is assessed through composite reliability (CR) and literature review, eight constructs were developed, and eight hypotheses
Cronbach’s alfa (CA), which must be above 0.70, as suggested by Hair were formulated. Only two of these failed to receive support, and it can
et al. (2021). Table 2 shows CR and CA, and only the construct extreme be seen that most of the selected hypotheses were validated based on the
drought fails to meet this condition, since it has a value of 0.615. findings.

Table 2
Means, standard deviations, correlations, and reliability and validity measures (CR, CA, and AVE) of latent variables.
Constructs Mean SD CA CR Aff Soc PC Hab Int ED WS WSB

Affect 5.612 1.322 0.863 0.864 0.938

Social Factors 4.341 1.206 0.802 0.815 0.446 0.749
PercCons 5.917 0.963 0.857 0.862 0.590 0.472 0.800
Habit 5.373 1.380 0.940 0.943 0.672 0.473 0.616 0.920
Intention 5.850 1.079 0.868 0.877 0.597 0.430 0.709 0.646 0.850
ImpacExtr Drought 6.028 1.077 0.615 0.707 0.499 0.360 0.503 0.463 0.514 0.844
AwarWaterScarcity 6.070 0.919 0.800 0.828 0.484 0.350 0.637 0.517 0.605 0.664 0.789
Water Sav Behav 5.863 1.121 0.898 0.904 0.607 0.393 0.598 0.717 0.590 0.524 0.588 0.912

5
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

Table 3
PLS Loadings and cross-loading.
Constructs Affect Social PCons Habit Intent ExtDr WatSc WSB

Affect AFF2 0.936 0.404 0.544 0.606 0.549 0.433 0.449 0.571
AFF3 0.940 0.432 0.563 0.653 0.570 0.502 0.458 0.567
Social factors SF1 0.267 0.740 0.327 0.316 0.308 0.162 0.227 0.259
SF2 0.350 0.837 0.385 0.344 0.336 0.328 0.314 0.353
SF3 0.399 0.814 0.374 0.397 0.350 0.326 0.300 0.361
SF4 0.364 0.708 0.382 0.394 0.363 0.343 0.257 0.279
SF5 0.267 0.627 0.281 0.308 0.223 0.138 0.195 0.185
Perceived conseq. PC1 0.481 0.397 0.732 0.529 0.515 0.372 0.529 0.468
PC2 0.413 0.298 0.750 0.391 0.526 0.332 0.414 0.380
PC3 0.561 0.398 0.826 0.571 0.572 0.483 0.557 0.548
PC4 0.535 0.443 0.894 0.570 0.605 0.455 0.571 0.571
PC5 0.371 0.349 0.787 0.402 0.607 0.363 0.474 0.419
Habits HAB1 0.614 0.455 0.572 0.918 0.581 0.404 0.477 0.681
HAB2 0.606 0.441 0.616 0.932 0.630 0.424 0.512 0.712
HAB3 0.651 0.445 0.563 0.918 0.620 0.466 0.462 0.642
HAB4 0.599 0.397 0.507 0.912 0.538 0.410 0.447 0.594
Intention INT1 0.501 0.388 0.631 0.573 0.913 0.418 0.524 0.513
INT2 0.554 0.422 0.600 0.650 0.905 0.439 0.562 0.559
INT3 0.542 0.361 0.608 0.514 0.854 0.456 0.483 0.480
INT4 0.423 0.279 0.571 0.441 0.713 0.439 0.484 0.444
Impact of extreme drought ED2 0.370 0.261 0.324 0.285 0.335 0.766 0.417 0.315
ED4 0.464 0.340 0.499 0.468 0.508 0.916 0.666 0.534
Awareness of water scarcity WS1 0.331 0.283 0.417 0.346 0.392 0.510 0.751 0.360
WS2 0.335 0.325 0.369 0.391 0.328 0.356 0.693 0.421
WS3 0.431 0.279 0.626 0.454 0.565 0.560 0.864 0.546
WS4 0.413 0.247 0.549 0.432 0.570 0.635 0.836 0.501
Water Sav. Consump. behaviour WSCB1 0.514 0.372 0.522 0.598 0.482 0.424 0.504 0.894
WSCB2 0.586 0.376 0.546 0.706 0.567 0.476 0.555 0.949
WSCB3 0.556 0.327 0.569 0.650 0.558 0.531 0.548 0.892

Table 4
Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio of correlations (HTMT).
Constructs Aff Social PCons Habit Inten ExTD WatS WSB

Affect
Social Factors 0.530
Perc. Conseq 0.687 0.564
Habit 0.745 0.541 0.685
Intention 0.689 0.505 0.824 0.710
Impact Extr Drought 0.674 0.486 0.666 0.583 0.684
Awareness Water Scarcity 0.575 0.443 0.749 0.591 0.704 0.890
Water Sav Behav 0.687 0.454 0.681 0.775 0.665 0.670 0.681

topic.
Intention is explained by affect, perceived consequences, and habit,
which aligns with previous research considering that affect can, in fact,
positively influence pro-environmental intention, since environmentally
friendly behaviour tends to associate with positive emotions, which in
turn can motivate people to choose such behaviour (Onwezen, 2015).
Perceived consequences play a significant role in predicting intentions,
agreeing with Monteiro et al. (2012), who found that these are strong
predictors of intentions that lead to behaviour. Habit, according to the
literature, has contrasting opinions on whether it has an impact on
intention or not. Boazar et al. (2019) declared that it was not a predictor
of intention. Their conclusions contrast with those of Boots and Treloar
(2000) and Heydarian et al. (2020) stated that habit was a strong pre­
Fig. 2. Structural model results. dictor of intention when applying TIB. In technology use, as experience
increases, habit also becomes a stronger predictor of use than intention
5.1. Theoretical implications (Azman Ong et al., 2023; de Blanes Sebastián et al., 2023; Rifqi Hidayat
et al., 2023; Venkatesh et al., 2023) so once habit is settled, behaviour is
Prior research approaches, in which TPB is used, differ considerably more likely to be influenced by it than by intention (Gardner, 2009).
from the one we employed. Our methodology differed substantially, Unlike affect and perceived consequences, social factors did not have
since one single model, based on TIB, was adapted to the research and a positive impact on intention, which was surprising since many other
into it two constructs were integrated – impact of extreme drought and studies have mentioned this construct as having a strong positive in­
awareness of water scarcity. Findings align with those of earlier fluence: either in the adoption intention of HEMS (Home Energy Man­
research, establishing the validity of most of the hypotheses explored in agement System) (Chen et al., 2020), CAVIE (consumer’s intentions of
our investigation regarding the factors that influence our study’s main electric vehicle adoption) (Singh et al., 2020), adoption of climate

6
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

change-related behaviours (Cialdini & Jacobson, 2021), or even in green for an exploration of how subjective thought and perceptions influence
products’ consumer purchase intention (Zhuang et al., 2021). Therefore, human behaviour. In addition to that, data were collected from only a
both affect (emotions) and perceived consequences have more impact on specific public, the Portuguese population. Additionally, this study
intention, showing a limited social influence. Individuals might perceive could be expanded to explore potential societal and cultural norms that
water-saving consumption behaviour as a personal responsibility rather may influence the values associated with water and therefore water use
than as a social norm, as every person should do their part and if they do behaviours in Portuguese society (Haddad, 2015; Otte et al., 2021).
not, it could result in negative consequences, individually and collec­ The sample for this study was drawn through word of mouth (WOM),
tively, thereby contributing to the loss of the commons as it lacks the reaching out to friends and co-workers without specific expertise or
importance it deserves as a social norm. experience criteria, who in turn invited others to participate in the
Like social factors, the impact of extreme drought did not have a survey through social media and chat channels. This approach allowed
positive impact on intention. Individuals might consider extreme us to include individuals without regard to their background, experi­
drought more of a long-term problem (and thus “far away”), unlike ence, or qualifications. However, this method did not involve key in­
water scarcity, which is more immediately alarming and had a positive formants, which is a limitation of our study. Future researchers should
impact on intention, due to that urgency to prevent water shortages consider employing a qualitative approach with key informants to
(Jury & Vaux, 2007). Additionally, water scarcity might seem more enhance the validity and depth of the findings.
manageable through individual actions, unlike extreme drought which While our research adopts Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour (TIB)
usually requires collective action and systemic change. to explore the interaction of personal and social factors in household
water management, several other constructs or other theories connected
5.2. Practical implications to environmental psychology could be applied. RANAS model (Mosler,
2012) specifically, holds promise as a valuable theory for studying water
Hydrological changes and increasing drought frequency require conservation behaviours since it incorporates factors such as risk
water conservation and management policies that will protect and save perception, attitude formation, norm, ability, and self-regulation. It
water and meet future water issues. Nevertheless, this is not enough, provides a robust foundation for analysing, designing, and implement­
since prompt intervention has a limited impact (Cravens et al., 2021; ing behaviour-change interventions, particularly in the realm of pro-
Wang & Chermak, 2021) and maintaining individual water conservation environmental behaviours. It can capture a wide array of influences
behaviours, even when water scarcity is no longer that predominant, is a on decision-making, making it a valuable tool for understanding water-
challenge (Moglia et al., 2018). related behaviours, also providing a deeper understanding into multi­
A multitude of responses such as research and investment in policies faceted nature of household water conservation.
and programs, effective and improved legislation, awareness, and col­ Additionally, it is possible that some of the questions asked in the
lective action must be implemented to reverse the current situation questionnaire regarding reducing water scarcity have a more limited
(Bamberg et al., 2018). Without changes from individuals, any efforts scope for the user level. A more comprehensive question would be more
will be incomplete. It is therefore of growing importance to involve relevant and broader. Moreover, we also recommend the exploration of
society, encourage water literacy, an individual’s understanding of the influence of family structure on water conservation behaviours to
water-related issues, including water conservation, management, and provide a more comprehensive understanding of factors affecting
environmental impact, such as personal water consumption, knowledge decision-making processes and their implications on water conservation
of sustainable water practices, and an understanding of the broader behaviours. For future studies, it could also be useful to consider in-
ecological implications of water use. Greater and more widespread person distribution since it may enhance the method, allowing for
water literacy in the population will make it easier to begin truly researcher guidance, clarification of participant queries, and potential
meaningful discussions such as the present one (Dean et al., 2016). This observation of non-verbal cues during the sorting process.
will allow cross-sectoral development (McCarroll & Hamann, 2020) and Finally, the exclusion of certain items from the study was based on
reach sustainable solutions (Bell et al., 2018). statistical indicator criteria, overlooking potential inclusion with justi­
It might also be helpful to adopt other water-saving measures start­ fiable explanations. However, their incorporation could introduce bias
ing with small efforts such as water-saving appliances, which are into the interpretation of study results. Future studies could explore
accessible in the Portuguese market and complemented by government these same questions in different geographies and test for differences.
programs at a municipal level that offer low-cost water-saving appliance
kits, and progressing to social feedback comparison (helpful for heavy 6. Conclusions
water users but counterproductive for light water users), incentives
(which are not many when it comes to water saving), and residential The human brain is influenced by a multitude of events and can
water tariffs and pricing that aim to strike a balance between water trigger so many different behaviours, that its exploration in previous
conservation and affordability by increasing prices based on consump­ studies remains substantially unexplored. This study seeks to understand
tion levels or simple water saving attitudes like repairing dripping taps how people use water and their behaviour impacts consumption during
or reusing bathwater (Kelly et al., 2015; Lu et al., 2019). droughts. In many ways, people are influenced by others (Franks, 2010)
Priorities should be well defined and there should exist transversal and this research demonstrates that social psychology will serve as a
cooperation between the environment, economy, and society, to achieve predominant guiding principle for understanding human behaviour.
sustainable economic, environmental, industrial, and human develop­ We introduced a paradigm shift in research methodology by
ment (McCarroll & Hamann, 2020; Wright et al., 2020), because climate breaking from conventional research and embracing the theory of
change is going to change human adaptability, and all efforts are needed interpersonal behaviour (TIB) to integrate extreme drought and water
(Evans, 2019). scarcity into understanding consumer behaviour. The theoretical
contribution arises from the also surprising fact that intention was in­
5.3. Limitations & recommendations for future works dependent of social factors (H6 was not supported). It is also interesting
to note that the TIB (main) hypothesis, suggesting the influence of social
Regarding the limitations of the present study, it is important to note factors on intention was not supported, which may happen when in­
that data are cross-sectional, which means they were collected for only a dividuals might perceive water-saving consumption behaviour as a
certain period. So, as a recommendation, it could be beneficial to do personal responsibility rather than as a social norm. Notably, the impact
longitudinal research, to gather and study people’s perceptions at of extreme drought is not having the expected influence on intention
several points of time or apply the Q method, a mixed method approach, contrasting with water scarcity’s prompting of urgency and personal

7
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

responsibility, positively impacting intention towards water-saving para a Ciência e a Tecnologia), under the project - UIDB/04152/2020
behaviour. (DOI: 10.54499/UIDB/04152/2020) - Centro de Investigação em Gestão
So, our findings align with prior research since most hypotheses are de Informação (MagIC)/NOVA IMS).
validated, yet unveiling insights: while affect, perceived consequences,
and habits strongly influence intention, social factors surprisingly CRediT authorship contribution statement
exhibit limited impact. Besides that, the study underscores the crucial
role of extreme drought and water scarcity in elevating awareness about Sofia Veloso: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft,
limited water resources, emphasizing the need for comprehensive stra­ Visualization, Investigation, Data curation. Carlos Tam: Writing – re­
tegies spanning policies, legislation, societal engagement, and water view & editing, Validation, Supervision, Software, Resources, Method­
literacy efforts to achieve sustainable solutions and sustainable devel­ ology, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Tiago Oliveira: Writing –
opment through cooperation in the environment, economy, and society. review & editing, Validation.
It is crucial to start developing a strong body of evidence about house­
hold water consumption today so that it can be used to shape water Declaration of competing interest
conservation policies when needed in the future.
From theoretical development, the results highlight the need for The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
researchers to develop both tailor-made research models and not simply interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
test theories that already exists. It is challenging to fully embrace a the work reported in this paper.
single model across a variety of possible situations. The integration of
TIB with outer dimensions that complement each other, means that their Data availability
combination is useful for understanding how behaviour impacts con­
sumption. Future research may draw on other theories to explore the Catchment data is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zen­
effects of other factors. We encourage researchers to conduct replication odo.8037122. The statistical analysis of the data was carried out using
studies to confirm (or possibly challenge) this study’s findings, in partial least squares (PLS), more specifically using software SmartPLS
different regions or countries. 4.0.9.0 available on https://www.smartpls.com/.

Funding

This work was supported by national funds through FCT (Fundação

Appendix

Appendix A − Items
Constructs Items Adapted from
Affect AFF1 I feel that saving water to prevent extreme drought is …1. Unpleasant–Pleasant 2. (Moody & Siponen, 2013; H. Triandis, 1980)
Useless–Valuable 3. Wrong-Right
AFF2 Using water consciously creates a sense of tranquility.
AFF3 I feel relaxed when I am able to save water while doing my daily tasks.
Social factors SF1 My family suggests that I save water. (Pee et al., 2008; H. Triandis, 1980)
SF2 My colleagues/employers suggest that I save water.
SF3 My friends suggest that I save water.
SF4 The conscious use of water or the use of water saving practices is suggested by the community
I belong to.
SF5 Government issues regulations which encourage the saving of water or its conscious use.
Perceived conseq. Saving water and using water-saving tools and practices would…’ (Gagnon et al., 2003; Limayem et al., 2004)
PC1 Improve my sense of ethics.
PC2 Allows me to save money.
PC3 Improve my quality of life.
PC4 Allow me to better control my usage.
PC5 Allow me to reduce waste of water.
Habits In regard to using water with a focus on its saving, answer the following questions. (Verplanken & Orbell, 2003)
HAB1 I do it naturally.
HAB2 I do it frequently.
HAB3 It makes me feel weird if I do not do it.
HAB4 I would find it hard not to do it.
Intention INT1 I intend to use water-saving practices or tools in the future. (strongly (Limayem et al., 2000)
disagree–neutral–strongly agree)
INT2 I will use water-saving practices or tools in the future. (strongly disagree–neutral–strongly
agree)
INT3 I expect to use water-saving practices or tools in the future. (strongly
disagree–neutral–strongly agree)
INT4 If I have to decide on purchasing a domestic water tool/system, I intend to buy one that saves
water.
Extreme drought ED1 Individuals on their own cannot contribute to the reduction of problems related to extreme (Yildirim & Semiz, 2019)
drought.
ED2 Extreme drought is a problem throughout the country.
ED3 Extreme drought is a problem affecting my life.
ED4 I am concerned regarding the occurrence of drought periods, and their corresponding future
impacts on the life of myself and the future generations.
Water scarcity WS1 There is a possibility of a water scarcity in Portugal in the near future. (Reddy et al., 2023)
WS2 Water scarcity issues do not affect me.
(continued on next page)

8
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

(continued )
WS3 Water conservation is necessary because of water scarcity.
WS4 More attention to the water scarcity problem is needed.
Water saving WSCB1 In general, I use water saving practices (for example, I take showers instead of baths, I take (Pee et al., 2008; Van Rijnsoever & Farla, 2014;
consumpt. shorter baths, or I turn off the tap while brushing my teeth, I only run the dishwasher/washing Verhoest et al., 2022; Yildirim & Semiz, 2019)
behaviour machine when it is full).
WSCB2 I try to avoid wasting water.
WSCB3 I try to limit my use of water when performing household tasks.
WSCB4 I prioritize the purchase of water saving tools (for example, dual-flush toilets, low-flow faucets
or low-flow showerhead).
WSCB5 I collect and reuse rainwater for non-potable purposes (e.g., collect rain and use for watering
plants).
WSCB6 I could make more effort to save water.

References preparedness and response actions. Weather Clim. Extremes 33. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.wace.2021.100362.
de Blanes Sebastián, M.G., Antonovica, A., Sarmiento Guede, J.R., 2023. What are the
Abbott, D., Wilson, G., 2012. The Lived Experience of Climate Change: Complementing
leading factors for using Spanish peer-to-peer mobile payment platform Bizum? The
the Natural and Social Sciences for Knowledge. Policy and Action Vol. 3, Issue 4. htt
applied analysis of the UTAUT2 model. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 187, 122235
ps://doi.org/10.18848/1835-7156/CGP/v03i04/37123.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2022.122235.
AghaKouchak, A., Feldman, D., Hoerling, M., Huxman, T., Lund, J., 2016. Recognize
De Jager, A., Corbane, C., Szabo, F., 2022. Recent Developments in Some Long-Term
Anthropogenic Drought. Nature 409–411. https://doi.org/10.1038/524409a.
Drought Drivers. Climate 10 (3). https://doi.org/10.3390/cli10030031.
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50
Dean, A.J., Fielding, K.S., Newton, F.J., 2016. Community knowledge about water: Who
(2), 179–211.
has better knowledge and is this associated with water-related behaviors and support
Akhtar, N., Syakir Ishak, M.I., Bhawani, S.A., Umar, K., 2021. Various natural and
for water-related policies? PLoS One 11 (7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
anthropogenic factors responsible for water quality degradation: A review. Water
pone.0159063.
(switzerland) 13 (19). https://doi.org/10.3390/w13192660.
Dissanayake, C.A.K., Jayathilake, W., Wickramasuriya, H.V.A., Dissanayake, U.,
M. Ambaum R. Corten M. Lambooij M. Van Der Aa F. Van Harreveld V. Buskens Long-
Kopiyawattage, K.P.P., Wasala, W.M.C.B., 2022. Theories and Models of Technology
term water conservation behaviour: a systematic review 2023 https://ssrn.com/
Adoption in Agricultural Sector. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies 2022,
abstract=4395663.
1–15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9258317.
Azman Ong, M.H., Yusri, M.Y., Ibrahim, N.S., 2023. Use and behavioural intention using
Echegaray, F., Hansstein, F.V., 2017. Assessing the intention-behavior gap in electronic
digital payment systems among rural residents: Extending the UTAUT-2 model.
waste recycling: the case of Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 180–190. https://doi.org/
Technol. Soc. 74, 102305 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHSOC.2023.102305.
10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2016.05.064.
Bamberg, S., Ajzen, I., Schmidt, P., 2003. Choice of Travel Mode in the Theory of Planned
Edwards, B., Gray, M., Hunter, B., 2015. The Impact of Drought on Mental Health in
Behavior: The Roles of Past Behavior, Habit, and Reasoned Action. Basic Appl. Soc.
Rural and Regional Australia. Soc. Indic. Res. 121 (1), 177–194. https://doi.org/
Psychol. 25 (3), 175–187. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324834BASP2503_01.
10.1007/s11205-014-0638-2.
Bamberg, S., Rees, J.H., Schulte, M., 2018. Environmental protection through societal
Edwards, B., Gray, M., Hunter, B., 2019. The social and economic impacts of drought.
change: What psychology knows about collective climate action—and what it needs
Aust. J. Soc. Issues 54 (1), 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.52.
to find out. Psychology and Climate Change: Human Perceptions, Impacts, and
Esfahanian, E., Nejadhashemi, A.P., Abouali, M., Adhikari, U., Zhang, Z., Daneshvar, F.,
Responses 185–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813130-5.00008-4.
Herman, M.R., 2017. Development and evaluation of a comprehensive drought
Bamberg, S., Schmidt, P., 2003. Incentives, morality, or habit? Predicting students’ car
index. J. Environ. Manage. 185, 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
use for University routes with the models of Ajzen, Schwartz, and Triandis. Environ.
jenvman.2016.10.050.
Behav. 35 (2), 264–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916502250134.
Evans, G.W., 2019. Projected Behavioral Impacts of Global Climate Change. Annu. Rev.
Bell, J.E., Brown, C.L., Conlon, K., Herring, S., Kunkel, K.E., Lawrimore, J., Luber, G.,
Psychol 70, 449–474. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418.
Schreck, C., Smith, A., Uejio, C., 2018. Changes in extreme events and the potential
Extreme Drought Definition | Law Insider. (n.d.). Retrieved January 29, 2023, from
impacts on human health. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 68 (4), 265–287. https://doi.
https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/extreme-drought.
org/10.1080/10962247.2017.1401017.
Fao, 2012. Coping with water scarcity An action framework for agriculture and food
Bernerth, J.B., Aguinis, H., 2016. A Critical Review and Best-Practice Recommendations
security. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 79.
for Control Variable Usage. Pers. Psychol. 69 (1), 229–283. https://doi.org/
Fielding, K.S., Spinks, A., Russell, S., McCrea, R., Stewart, R., Gardner, J., 2013. An
10.1111/PEPS.12103.
experimental test of voluntary strategies to promote urban water demand
Boazar, M., Yazdanpanah, M., Abdeshahi, A., 2019. Response to water crisis: How do
management. J. Environ. Manage. 114, 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Iranian farmers think about and intent in relation to switching from rice to less
jenvman.2012.10.027.
water-dependent crops? J. Hydrol. 570, 523–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Fishbein, M., 1967. Attitude and the prediction of behavior. Readings in Attitude Theory
jhydrol.2019.01.021.
and Measurement 477–492.
Boots, R.J., Treloar, C., 2000. Prediction of intern attendance at a seminar-based training
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with
programme: a behavioural intention model. Med. Educ. 34, 512–518.
Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. In Source. J. Mark. Res. Vol. 18,
Britannica. (n.d.). Water scarcity | Description, Mechanisms, Effects, & Solutions.
Issue 1.
Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/water-
Franks, D. D. (2010). Neurosociology: The nexus between neuroscience and social
scarcity.
psychology. Neurosociology: The Nexus Between Neuroscience and Social
Callejas Moncaleano, D.C., Pande, S., Rietveld, L., 2021. Water Use Efficiency: A Review
Psychology, 1–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5531-9/COVER.
of Contextual and Behavioral Factors. Frontiers in Water 3. https://doi.org/
Gagnon, M.P., Godin, G., Gagné, C., Fortin, J.P., Lamothe, L., Reinharz, D., Cloutier, A.,
10.3389/frwa.2021.685650.
2003. An adaptation of the theory of interpersonal behaviour to the study of
Carrus, G., Passafaro, P., Bonnes, M., 2008. Emotions, habits and rational choices in
telemedicine adoption by physicians. Int. J. Med. Inf. 71 (2–3), 103–115. https://
ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation.
doi.org/10.1016/S1386-5056(03)00094-7.
J. Environ. Psychol. 28 (1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVP.2007.09.003.
Gardner, B., 2009. Modelling motivation and habit in stable travel mode contexts.
Chen, C. fei, Zarazua de Rubens, G., Xu, X., & Li, J. (2020). Coronavirus comes home?
Transport. Res. f: Traffic Psychol. Behav. 12 (1), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Energy use, home energy management, and the social-psychological factors of
trf.2008.08.001.
COVID-19. In Energy Research and Social Science (Vol. 68). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.
Gardner, B., Lally, P., Rebar, A.L., 2020. Does habit weaken the relationship between
org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101688.
intention and behaviour? Revisiting the habit-intention interaction hypothesis. Soc.
Chin, W. W. (1998). Commentary: Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling.
Pers. Psychol. Compass 14 (8). https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12553.
In Quarterly (Vol. 22, Issue 1).
R. Gifford Environmental Psychology Matters. Https:// 2014 Doi.Org/10.1146/Annurev-
Cialdini, R.B., Jacobson, R.P., 2021. Influences of social norms on climate change-related
Psych-010213-115048, 65, 541-579. 10.1146/ANNUREV-PSYCH-010213-115048.
behaviors. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 42, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Gilg, A., Barr, S., 2006. Behavioural attitudes towards water saving? Evidence from a
cobeha.2021.01.005.
study of environmental actions. Ecol. Econ. 57 (3), 400–414. https://doi.org/
Cook, B.I., Anchukaitis, K.J., Touchan, R., Meko, D.M., Cook, E.R., 2016. Spatiotemporal
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.010.
drought variability in the mediterranean over the last 900 years. J. Geophys. Res.
Gómez-Llanos, E., Durán-Barroso, P., Robina-Ramírez, R., 2020. Analysis of consumer
121 (5), 2060–2074. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023929.
awareness of sustainable water consumption by the water footprint concept. Sci.
Cravens, A.E., Henderson, J., Friedman, J., Burkardt, N., Cooper, A.E., Haigh, T.,
Total Environ. 721 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137743.
Hayes, M., McEvoy, J., Paladino, S., Wilke, A.K., Wilmer, H., 2021. A typology of
Gonçalves, J., Mateus, R., Silvestre, J.D., Roders, A.P., 2020. Going beyond good
drought decision making: Synthesizing across cases to understand drought
intentions for the sustainable conservation of built heritage: A systematic literature

9
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

review. Sustainability (switzerland) 12 (22), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3390/ with global warming. Glob. Environ. Chang. 68 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
su12229649. gloenvcha.2021.102247.
Götz, O., Liehr-Gobbers, K., Krafft, M., 2010. Evaluation of Structural Equation Models Matsuno, K., Mentzer, J.T., Rentz, J.O., 2005. A conceptual and empirical comparison of
Using the Partial Least Squares (PLS) Approach. In Handbook of Partial Least three market orientation scales. J. Bus. Res. 58 (1 SPEC.ISS), 1–8. https://doi.org/
Squares. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8_30. 10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00075-4.
Grégoire, Y., Fisher, R.J., 2006. The Effects of Relationship Quality on Customer McCarroll, M., Hamann, H., 2020. What we know about water: A water literacy review.
Retaliation. 17 (1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/sl. Water (switzerland) 12 (10). https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102803.
Gu, D., Jiang, J., Zhang, Y., Sun, Y., Jiang, W., Du, X., 2020. Concern for the future and Mekonnen, M.M., Hoekstra, A.Y., 2016. Sustainability: Four billion people facing severe
saving the earth: When does ecological resource scarcity promote pro-environmental water scarcity. Sci. Adv. 2 (2) https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500323.
behavior? J. Environ. Psychol. 72 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101501. Moglia, M., Cook, S., Tapsuwan, S., 2018. Promoting water conservation: Where to from
Gu, J., Sun, S., Wang, Y., Li, X., Yin, Y., Sun, J., Qi, X., 2021. Sociohydrology: An here? Water (switzerland) 10 (11). https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111510.
Effective Way to Reveal the Coupled Evolution of Human and Water Systems. Water Moldovan, M.G., Dabija, D.C., Pocol, C.B., 2022. Resources Management for a Resilient
Resour. Manag. 35 (14), 4995–5010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-021-02984-3. World: A Literature Review of Eastern European Countries with Focus on Household
Haddad, M. (2015). Social, Religious, and Cultural Influences on the Sustainability of Behaviour and Trends Related to Food Waste. Sustainability (switzerland) 14 (12).
Water and Its Use. In Green Energy and Technology (Vol. 0, Issue 9783319123936). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127123.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12394-3_19. Monteiro, S.P., Van Dijk, L., Verstraete, A.G., Álvarez, F.J., Heissing, M., De Gier, J.J.,
Hair, J., Hult, T., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares 2012. Predictors for patient knowledge and reported behaviour regarding driving
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Second Edition. under the influence of medicines: A multi-country survey. BMC Public Health 12 (1).
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2013. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-59.
Modeling: Rigorous Applications, Better Results and Higher Acceptance. In: Long Moody, G.D., Siponen, M., 2013. Using the theory of interpersonal behavior to explain
Range Planning, Vol. 46(1–2. Elsevier Ltd., pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. non-work-related personal use of the Internet at work. Inf. Manag. 50 (6), 322–335.
lrp.2013.01.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2013.04.005.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N.P., Ray, S., 2021. Partial Mosler, H.J., 2012. A systematic approach to behavior change interventions for the water
Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R. Springer and sanitation sector in developing countries: a conceptual model, a review, and a
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7. guideline. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 22 (5), 431–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Hallegatte, S., Vogt-Schilb, A., Bangalore, M., & Rozenberg, J. (2017). Building the 09603123.2011.650156.
Resilience of the Poor in the Face of Natural Disasters Climate Change and Mumtaz, S., Chu, A.M.Y., Attiq, S., Shah, H.J., Wong, W.K., 2022. Habit—Does It Matter?
Development Series. Bringing Habit and Emotion into the Development of Consumer’s Food Waste
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., Sinkovics, R.R., 2009. The use of partial least squares path Reduction Behavior with the Lens of the Theory of Interpersonal Behavior. Int. J.
modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing 20, Environ. Res. Public Health 19 (10). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106312.
277–319. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014. Nagaraju, A., Thejaswi, A., Sreedhar, Y., 2016. Assessment of Groundwater Quality of
Heydarian, A., McIlvennie, C., Arpan, L., Yousefi, S., Syndicus, M., Schweiker, M., Udayagiri area. Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh, South India Using Multivariate
Jazizadeh, F., Rissetto, R., Pisello, A.L., Piselli, C., Berger, C., Yan, Z., Mahdavi, A., Statistical Techniques.
2020. What drives our behaviors in buildings? A review on occupant interactions M. Ojala Recycling and Ambivalence. Http://dx. 2008 Doi.Org/10.1177/
with building systems from the lens of behavioral theories. Build. Environ. 179, 0013916507308787, 40(6), 777-797. 10.1177/0013916507308787.
106928 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BUILDENV.2020.106928. Onwezen, M.C., 2015. I did good, and we did bad: The impact of collective versus private
Hoekstra, A.Y., Wiedmann, T.O., 2014. Humanity’s unsustainable environmental emotions on pro-environmental food consumption. Food Res. Int. 76 (P2), 261–268.
footprint. Science 344 (6188), 1114–1117. https://doi.org/10.1126/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.03.032.
science.1248365. Orbell, S., Hodgkins, S., Sheeran, P., 2016. Implementation Intentions and the Theory of
IPMA. (2022). Monotorização da Seca Meteorológica. https://www.ipma.pt/pt/oclima/ Planned Behavior. Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/0146167297239004 23 (9), 945–954.
observatorio.secas/. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297239004.
Jackson, T., Begg, K., Darnton, A., Davey, A., Dobson, A., Ekins, P., Garnett, T., Otte, A., Coates, D., Connor, R., 2021. Culture and the Values of Water - UNESCO Digital
Gatersleben, B., Hallsworth, A., Holdsworth, M., Jacobs, M., Jones, B., Lee, A., Library. The United Nations World Water Development Report 2021: Valuing Water.
Leveson-Gower, H., Levett, R., Lucas, K., Manoochehri, J., Massey, M., Michaelis, L., UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme, France.
… Uzzell, D. (2005). Motivating Sustainable Consumption a review of evidence on Pee, L.G., Woon, I.M.Y., Kankanhalli, A., 2008. Explaining non-work-related computing
consumer behaviour and behavioural change a report to the Sustainable in the workplace: A comparison of alternative models. Inf. Manag. 45 (2), 120–130.
Development Research Network. www.surrey.ac.uk/CES. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2008.01.004.
Johnson, R.E., Rosen, C.C., Djurdjevic, E., 2011. Assessing the impact of common method Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method
variance on higher order multidimensional constructs. J. Appl. Psychol. 96 (4), biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended
744–761. remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 (5), 879–903.
Jury, W.A., Vaux, H.J., 2007. The Emerging Global Water Crisis: Managing Scarcity and Pronello, C., Gaborieau, J.B., 2018. Engaging in pro-environment travel behaviour
Conflict Between Water Users. Adv. Agron. 95, 1–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/ research from a psycho-social perspective: A review of behavioural variables and
S0065-2113(07)95001-4. theories. Sustainability (switzerland) 10 (7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072412.
D. Kelly D.A. Kelly D. Fong Sustainable Urbanism View project Water conservation: the Reddy, R.A., Sengupta, R., Jackson, B.M., Lewis, C., 2023. Development of a new
implications of user awareness, attitude, and behaviour 2015 https://www. measure to check attitude towards water conservation. MethodsX 101992. https://
researchgate.net/publication/281206807. doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2022.101992.
Kneebone, S., Fielding, K., Smith, L., 2018. It’s what you do and where you do it: Rifqi Hidayat, M.N., Latifah, L., Tusyanah, T., 2023. Analyzing the factors affecting the
Perceived similarity in household water saving behaviours. J. Environ. Psychol. 55, use behavior of the SIRADI system through behavioral intention as the mediating
1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.10.007. variable using the UTAUT 2 model. Sustainable Social Development 1 (2). https://d
Koop, S.H.A., Van Dorssen, A.J., Brouwer, S., 2019. Enhancing domestic water oi.org/10.54517/ssd.v1i2.2223.
conservation behaviour: A review of empirical studies on influencing tactics. Rogers, R.W., 1975. A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude
J. Environ. Manage. 247, 867–876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Change. J. Psychol. 91 (1), 93–114.
jenvman.2019.06.126. Schrieks, T., Botzen, W.J.W., Wens, M., Haer, T., Aerts, J.C.J.H., 2021. Integrating
Laroche, M., Bank, R., Molson, J., Bergeron, J., Barbaro-Forleo, G., 2001. Targeting Behavioral Theories in Agent-Based Models for Agricultural Drought Risk
consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Assessments. Frontiers in Water 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2021.686329.
Retrieved February 4, 2024, from http://www.emerald-library.com/ft. Schultz, P.W., Messina, A., Tronu, G., Limas, E.F., Gupta, R., Estrada, M., 2016.
Larose, R., Lai, Y.J., Lange, R., Love, B., Wu, Y., 1998. Sharing or Piracy? An Exploration Personalized Normative Feedback and the Moderating Role of Personal Norms: A
of Downloading Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00001.x. Field Experiment to Reduce Residential Water Consumption. Environ. Behav. 48 (5),
Limayem, M., Khalifa, M., Frini, A., 2000. What makes consumers buy from Internet? A 686–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916514553835.
longitudinal study of online shopping. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A Syst. Sheeran, P., Abraham, C., 2003. Mediator of moderators: temporal stability of intention
Hum. 30 (4), 421–432. https://doi.org/10.1109/3468.852436. and the intention-behavior relation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 29 (2), 205–215.
Limayem, M., Khalifa, M., Chin, W.W., 2004. Factors motivating software piracy: A https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202239046.
longitudinal study. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 51 (4), 414–425. https://doi.org/ Sheeran, P., Webb, T.L., 2016. The Intention-Behavior Gap. Soc. Pers. Psychol. Compass
10.1109/TEM.2004.835087. 10 (9), 503–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/SPC3.12265.
Linares, C., Díaz, J., Negev, M., Martínez, G.S., Debono, R., Paz, S., 2020. Impacts of Singh, V., Singh, V., Vaibhav, S., 2020. A review and simple meta-analysis of factors
climate change on the public health of the Mediterranean Basin population - Current influencing adoption of electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part d: Transp. Environ. 86
situation, projections, preparedness and adaptation. Environ. Res. 182 https://doi. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102436.
org/10.1016/j.envres.2019.109107. Šprajc, P., Bjegović, M., Vasić, B., 2019. Energy security in decision making and
Lindell, M.K., Whitney, D.J., 2001. Accounting for common method variance in cross- governance - Methodological analysis of energy trilemma index. Renew. Sustain.
sectional research designs. J. Appl. Psychol. 86 (1), 114–121. Energy Rev. 114 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109341.
Lu, L., Deller, D., Hviid, M., 2019. Price and Behavioural Signals to Encourage Household Steg, L., 2023. Psychology of. Clim. Change. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-
Water Conservation: Implications for the UK. Water Resour. Manag. 33 (2), 032720.
475–491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-018-2133-z. Steg, L., Vlek, C., 2009. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative
Marlon, J.R., Wang, X., Mildenberger, M., Bergquist, P., Swain, S., Hayhoe, K., Howe, P. review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 29 (3), 309–317. https://doi.org/
D., Maibach, E., Leiserowitz, A., 2021. Hot dry days increase perceived experience 10.1016/J.JENVP.2008.10.004.

10
S. Veloso et al. Journal of Hydrology 639 (2024) 131574

Tabari, H., Hosseinzadehtalaei, P., Thiery, W., Willems, P., 2021. Amplified Drought and Verhoest, P., Gaume, B., Bauwens, J., te Braak, P., Huysmans, M., 2022. Public
Flood Risk Under Future Socioeconomic and Climatic Change. Earth’s. Future 9 (10). acceptance of recycled water: A survey of social attitudes toward the consumption of
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EF002295. crops grown with treated wastewater. Sustainable Production and Consumption 34,
Taghikhah, F., Voinov, A., Shukla, N., Filatova, T., 2021. Shifts in consumer behavior 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.10.003.
towards organic products: Theory-driven data analytics. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 61, Verplanken, B., & Orbell, S. (2003). Reflections on Past Behavior: A Self-Report Index of
102516 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2021.102516. Habit Strength. In Journal of Applied Social Psychology (Vol. 33, Issue 6, pp.
Tiefenbeck, V., Goette, L., Degen, K., Tasic, V., Fleisch, E., Lalive, R., Staake, T., 2016. 1313–1330). Bellwether Publishing, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-
Overcoming Salience Bias: How Real-Time Feedback Fosters Resource Conservation. 1816.2003.tb01951.x.
Manag. Sci. 64 (3) https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000122629. Wang, J., Chermak, J.M., 2021. Is less always more? Conservation, efficiency and water
Triandis, H.C., 1977. Theory of interpersonal behavior. Brooks/Cole Pub, Co. education programs. Ecol. Econ. 184 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Triandis, H., 1980. Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. Nebraska Symposium ecolecon.2021.106994.
on Motivation, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Webb, D., Soutar, G.N., Mazzarol, T., Saldaris, P., 2013. Self-determination theory and
D. Tsegai M. Medel P. Augenstein Z. Huang COP-15 Côte d’Ivoire Drought in Numbers consumer behavioural change: Evidence from a household energy-saving behaviour
2022 https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/2022-05/Drought%20in% study. J. Environ. Psychol. 35, 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
20Numbers.pdf. JENVP.2013.04.003.
Turner, J., Tajfel, H., 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. Psychology Woon, I.M., Pee, L.G., 2004. Behavioral Factors Affecting Internet Abuse in the
of Intergroup Relations 5, 7–24. Workplace – An Empirical Investigation. SIGHCI 2004 Proceedings. http://aisel.aisn
UNICEF. (2021). Water security for all. et.org/sighci2004/5.
UN-Water. (n.d.). Water Scarcity. Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www. World Health Organization (WHO). (n.d.). Drought - Overview. https://www.who.int/
unwater.org/water-facts/water-scarcity. health-topics/drought#tab=tab_1.
van Griethuijsen, R.A.L.F., van Eijck, M.W., Haste, H., den Brok, P.J., Skinner, N.C., Wright, J.D., Schmitt, M.T., Mackay, C.M.L., Neufeld, S.D., 2020. Imagining a sustainable
Mansour, N., Gencer, A.S., BouJaoude, S., 2015. Global patterns in students’ views of world: Measuring cognitive alternatives to the environmental status quo. J. Environ.
science and interest in science. Res. Sci. Educ. 45 (4), 581–603. https://doi.org/ Psychol. 72 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101523.
10.1007/s11165-014-9438-6. WWF. (2021). Water Filter Risk - Countries profile. https://waterriskfilter.org/explore/
Van Rijnsoever, F.J., Farla, J.C.M., 2014. Identifying and explaining public preferences countryprofiles.
for the attributes of energy technologies. In: Renewable and Sustainable Energy Yildirim, B.Ç., Semiz, G.K., 2019. Future teachers’ sustainablewater consumption
Reviews, Vol. 31. Elsevier Ltd., pp. 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. behavior: A test of the value-belief-norm theory. Sustainability (switzerland) 11 (6).
rser.2013.11.048 https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061558.
Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D., Zhu, Y., 2023. Competing roles of intention and habit in Zhuang, W., Luo, X., Riaz, M.U., 2021. On the Factors Influencing Green Purchase
predicting behavior: A comprehensive literature review, synthesis, and longitudinal Intention: A Meta-Analysis Approach. Front. Psychol. 12 https://doi.org/10.3389/
field study. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 71 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102644. fpsyg.2021.644020.

11