In 2000 and 2001 Canadians were shocked by water contamination events that took place in two provinces. In 2004 we undertook an internet-based survey across Canada that asked respondents to identify in percentage terms their total drinking water consumption according to one of three sources: tap water, bottled water, and home-filtered water (either some type of container or an in-tap filter device). In this paper we investigate the factors that influence these choices and whether choosing to either filter or purchase water is linked to perceptions of health concerns with respect to tap water. A series of one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests suggest that the presence of children in a household and self-reported concern that tap water causes health problems lead to significantly greater consumption of bottled water or filtered water and significantly less tap water consumption. In order to examine these choices in a multivariate framework, we estimate a multinomial logit model. Factors yielding higher probabilities of a respondent being primarily a bottled water drinker (relative to the choice of tap water) include: higher income, unpleasant taste experiences with tap water, non-French-speaking, and being a male with children in one's household. Similar factors yield higher probabilities of a respondent being primarily a filtered tap water drinker. An important finding is that two key variables linking a person's health perceptions regarding tap water quality are significant factors leading to the choice of either filtered tap water or bottled water over tap water. They are: a variable showing the degree of health concerns a respondent has with respect to tap water and a second variable indicating whether the respondent believes bottled water is safer than tap water.

The relationship between tap water and health has been a topic of public concern and calls for better management in Canada since well-publicized contamination events in two provinces (Ontario and Saskatchewan) in 2000–2001. This study reports the perspectives on health risks from tap water and corresponding use of, and spending on, bottled water in a number of different communities in Canada. In 2009–2010, four First Nations communities (three from Ontario and one from Saskatchewan) and a geographically diverse sample of non-First Nations Canadians were surveyed about their beliefs concerning health risks from tap water and their spending practices for bottled water as a substitute. Responses to five identical questions were examined, revealing that survey respondents from Ontario First Nations communities were more likely than non-First Nations Canadians to believe bottled water is safer than tap water (OR 1.6); more likely to report someone became ill from tap water (OR 3.6); more likely to express water and health concerns related to tap water consumption (OR 2.4); and more likely to spend more on bottled water (OR 4.9). On the other hand, participants from one Saskatchewan First Nations community were less likely than non-First Nations Canadians to believe that someone had become ill from drinking tap water (OR 3.8), less likely to believe bottled water is safer than tap (OR 2.0), and less likely to have health concerns with tap water (OR 1.5). These differences, however, did not translate into differences in the likelihood of high bottled water expenditures or being a 100% bottled water consumer. The paper discusses how the differences observed may be related to water supply and regulation, trust, perceived control, cultural background, location, and past experience.

Recent human-interface wildfires around the world have raised concerns regarding the reliability of freshwater supply flowing from severely burned watersheds. Degraded source water quality can often be expected after severe wildfire and can pose challenges to drinking water facilities by straining treatment response capacities, increasing operating costs, and jeopardizing their ability to supply consumers. Identifying source watersheds that are dangerously exposed to post-wildfire hydrologic changes is important for protecting community drinking-water supplies from contamination risks that may lead to service disruptions. This study presents a spatial index of watershed exposure to wildfires in the province of Alberta, Canada, where growing water demands coupled with increasing fire activity threaten municipal drinking-water supplies. Using a multi-criteria analysis design, we integrated information regarding provincial forest cover, fire danger, source water volume, source-water origin (i.e., forested/un-forested), and population served. We found that (1) >2/3 of the population of the province relies on drinking-water supplies originating in forested watersheds, (2) forest cover is the most important variable controlling final exposure scores, and (3) watersheds supplying small drinking water treatment plants are particularly exposed, especially in central Alberta. The index can help regional authorities prioritize the allocation of risk management resources to mitigate adverse impacts from wildfire. The flexible design of this tool readily allows its deployment at larger national and continental scales to inform broader water security frameworks.

We examine factors that explain consumer spending on tap water substitutes using information from a national survey undertaken with a representative set of Canadian respondents. We develop a model to predict the percentage of households that undertake such spending for the purpose of reducing perceived health risks from tap water consumption. Using results from the model we estimate the magnitude of defensive expenditures to be over half a billion dollars (2010 US$) per year for Canada, as a whole. This is equivalent to approximately $48 per household per year or about $19 per person per year. Residents of Ontario, the province in which an Escherichia coli incident took place in 2000, have the highest willingness-to-pay of approximately $60 per household per year.