Preliminary studies indicate that Consumer ConfidenceReports (CCRs) may not be providing peoplewith the water quality information that theywant and can understand. Studies of risk perceptionand communication suggest that CCRs could be moreeffective if water suppliers asked its customers abouttheir concerns before issuing a CCR and were allowedto respond to them in the report.The author proposes that rather than continue withthe one-way communication supported by the CCR,utilities should routinely engage their customers in adialogue about customer questions and concerns. Perceptionsof risk, particularly from taste and odor problems,cannot be dismissed. Individuals' perceptions ofrisk are influenced more by what they experience thanby what utility personnel or CCRs tell them. Addressingtaste and odor problems through voluntary self-assessmentand improved treatment and distributionwill help utilities reduce the public's perception of riskand build the trust that is essential to communicatingeffectively with their customers.Historically, water providers have not placed a priorityon creating regular opportunities for communicationwith consumers. Ongoing dialogue, however, is usefulfor both utilities and their customers because it can clarifymisunderstandings, allow for feedback, and communicateimportant information. Many utilities have validconcerns about the efficacy of the CCR. This articleoffers guidelines for turning the CCR into a vehicle forgaining support and educating consumers, effectivelyimproving the process without necessitating revision ofthe CCR regulations. Includes 34 references.
