Fluid practices: examining responses to the disruption of everyday water use : A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Lincoln University

Social practice theorists regard resource consumption as a consequence of performing everyday social practices, the elements of which are deeply embedded within society at large and often outside of an individual’s control. Responsibility for resource use and any resulting environmental impacts, is therefore perceived to be dispersed and collective, rather than an individual burden. This is in stark contrast to the dominant approach to policymaking which is predicated on the personal responsibility of rational consumers, who are assumed to simply need access to the right information and eco-friendly products in order to make better consumer choices. Such as approach inadequately regards the significant roles that material infrastructure, economic institutions, multi-national corporations and social norms play in everyday social practices. In order to better understand what holds our everyday social practices together, my study looked at domestic water use through the lens of disruption. Participants’ responses to planned or unplanned disruptions to their everyday water-use were examined using a social practice theory approach. My findings indicate that our identities, relationships, emotions and senses influence our water use in both subtle and profound ways. Regardless of which elements of practice were disrupted, participants adapted their social practices in ways which preserved their identities and relationships. Senses and emotions appeared to moderate action by providing cues and feedback. There is an apparent disconnect between the consumer marketing approaches that influence our social practices (such as those which target our emotions and senses) and the rational governance of the resources used in their performance. Policy approaches to reducing demand should be more attentive to what really matters to people in their everyday lives. My study has found that our identities and relationships are what matter to us, and that we are responsive to emotional and sensory cues which help sustain them. Rational approaches to governing resources are simply not enough. We are more than rational. We are emotional, sensuous and relational beings.