ORIGINAL RESEARCH
published: 16 June 2022
doi: 10.3389/frwa.2022.930681
Response to Water Scarcity: Gender
Analysis of the Motivation Factors
Toward Water Conservation Behavior
in the Workplace
Lobina Gertrude Palamuleni 1*, Yvonne du Plessis 2 and Rhoda Cynthia Bakuwa 3
1
Unit of Environmental Science and Management, Department of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Natural
and Agricultural Sciences, North-West University, Mafikeng, South Africa, 2 Business School, Faculty of Economic and
Management Sciences, North-West University, Mafikeng, South Africa, 3 Department of Business Administration, Faculty of
Commerce, Malawi University of Business and Applied Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi
Edited by:
Bethany O’Shea,
University of San Diego, United States
Reviewed by:
Masoud Yazdanpanah,
University of Florida, United States
Dinara Ziganshina,
Scientific Information Centre of
Interstate Commission for Water
Coordination in Central
Asia, Uzbekistan
*Correspondence:
Lobina Gertrude Palamuleni
lobina.palamuleni@nwu.ac.za
Specialty section:
This article was submitted to
Water Resource Management,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Water
Received: 28 April 2022
Accepted: 20 May 2022
Published: 16 June 2022
Citation:
Palamuleni LG, Plessis Yd and
Bakuwa RC (2022) Response to
Water Scarcity: Gender Analysis of the
Motivation Factors Toward Water
Conservation Behavior in the
Workplace. Front. Water 4:930681.
doi: 10.3389/frwa.2022.930681
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
Provision and availability of water continue to be a major socio-economic challenge in
many countries. The problem is prevalent particularly in arid and semi-arid regions which
are affected by droughts and wide climate variability, combined with high population
growth and economic development. Shortages and compromised water availability are
causes of concern to food security (agricultural sector), performance of businesses, and
economic growth among others. The study adopted a quantitative research approach
and was underpinned by a positivist research paradigm. Data were collected from 72
managers at North West University—Mahikeng (NWU-Mahikeng), South Africa using an
online self-administered survey questionnaire. This study evaluates the factors related to
predictors of water-conservation motivation behavior at work. The study used the Chisquare statistics (Phi and Cramer’s V-tests) to test the relationship between Manager’s
gender and motivation predictors of water conservation at work. Findings from the
statistical results showed that the Phi and Cramer’s V-test gave a P-value < 0.05 (P <
0.05), which shows that within the sample of managers, there is significant relationship
between Manager’s gender and the motivation to conserve water. These results
highlight that gender orientation affects one’s response to water scarcity and motivation
for conservation. The variations underscored gender as an important component of
sustainable development goals which must be included when implementing policies and
programs to promote water conservation consciousness and efficient water use at work.
Keywords: gender, motivation, water conservation, water scarcity, workplace
INTRODUCTION
The principle of water conservation entails the preservation, control and management of water
resources. In the era of climate change and variability, scarcity and inequitable access to water, per
capita water availability has declined over the last decades (Rouault and Richard, 2003; Rodell et al.,
2018). Freshwater scarcity is expected to get worse with global warming leading to further depletion
and unpredictability of surface water sources. In essence, climate-induced ecological change will
alter drinking water availability, reliability, quality, quantity, and accessibility (Cole et al., 2020).
Water scarcity could mean scarcity in availability due to physical shortage, or scarcity in access due
to the failure of institutions to ensure a regular supply or due to a lack of adequate infrastructure
1
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681
Palamuleni et al.
Motivation to Conserve Water at Work
greater moral obligation to act pro-environmentally than men
as a result of gender-based socialization processes (Lee et al.,
2013). Women tend to be more sensitive to the feelings and needs
of others; and are thus more concerned about the environment
than men. According to Eagly (1987), females across cultures
are socialized to be more expressive, to have a stronger ethic of
care, and to be more interdependent, compassionate, nurturing,
cooperative, and helpful in caregiving roles; males, however,
are socialized to be more independent and competitive. In
theory, women are more motivated to work for the environment
compared to men who are more focused on economic issues, are
the main earners, and see themselves as more detached from the
natural world (Zelezny et al., 2000).
Empirical studies have shown that women seem to have
greater concern for the environment than men (e.g., Zelezny
et al., 2000; Dietz et al., 2002). The gender differences have
been explained using gender socialization theory (Zelezny
et al., 2000) which posits that women have a greater moral
obligation to act pro-environmentally than men as a result of
gender-based socialization processes (Lee et al., 2013). In the
water resources sector, the study by Tong et al. (2017) noted
differences in the motivations to engage in water conservation
practices between females and males. Female users adopted
water conservation practices mainly to save water costs, whereas
male users practice water conservation practices mainly to
alleviate water supply shortage. Singha and Eljamal (2021) found
significant positive behavior among female participants who
exhibited a more optimistic attitude and were more concerned
about water conservation. They were also more concerned about
environmental issues than male participants; and more engaged
to water conservation than males.
Scholars in the field of conservation psychology relate
environmental value to individual cognitions/emotions/behavior,
conceptualized in terms of the cognitive or emotional
connections individuals have with nature (Schultz, 2001).
Such values are not only pertinent to one’s perception and
knowledge toward environmental issues but also toward the
behavior that one consequently conducts (Law et al., 2017; Lin
and Niu, 2018). In addition, the way in which environmental
values are institutionally defined, may influence policy decisions
relating to behavioral change incentives. Behavioral theories
lead to emphasis placed on the study of specific behavior in a
society. This is where there is an understanding that behavior
is developed through conditioning which occurs as a specific
response to specific stimuli. Behaviorists believe that peoples’
responses to environmental stimuli shape their actions.
Previous research findings suggest that human behaviors and
business activities are some of the major underlying causes
of climate change and environmental problems (Cudmore,
2015). Steg and Vlek (2009) noted that in order to prevent
environmental disaster, human behavior needs to change
significantly through pro-environmental behavior (PEB). Proenvironmental behavior (PEB) seeks to minimize the negative
impact of one’s actions on the natural and built world
(Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002) and PEB can be adopted in
workplaces to lessen negative environmental impacts. Yuriev
et al. (2018) noted that workers in any organization can
(United Nations World Water Assessment Programme, 2018).
Around 1.2 billion people, or almost one-fifth of the world’s
population, live in areas of scarcity. Another 1.6 billion people,
or almost one quarter of the world’s population, face economic
water shortage (where countries lack the necessary infrastructure
to take water from rivers and aquifers; FAO, 2007). Given the
increasing demand for water and the uncertain future in supply,
there is a persistent need for nations to engage the public in water
conservation. Several strategies have been advocated for water
conservation to ensure water security under a looming climate
change threat such as water pricing (Dinar et al., 2015; Aprile
and Fiorillo, 2017), adoption of water saving technologies (Clarke
and Brown, 2006; Klein et al., 2006), water restrictions (Klein
et al., 2006), and pro-environmental behavior and environmental
education (Zietlow et al., 2016; Aprile and Fiorillo, 2017)
among others.
Previous studies have noted that water conservation strategies
must go hand in hand with conservation behavior. Fielding
et al. (2012), noted the importance of both technological
and behavioral approaches to water demand management,
whereby technological approaches must be coupled with water
conservation behavior that can help to ameliorate the potential
for offsetting behavior. Similarly, a study by Martínez-Espiñeira
and García-Valiñas (2013) concluded that issues of water scarcity
can be ameliorated through household adoption of watersaving technologies and by adaptation of consumption behavior.
Developing water conservation behaviors, attitudes and practices
in addition to water saving technologies all have a role to play
in determining water use and water consumption. Willis et al.
(2011) noted that those water users with positive attitudes toward
environmental sustainability would tend to be more cautious
when using water than those who do not highly value or consider
the environment.
The need to manage the usage of water through measures
such as efficient water use and improved technology; to reuse
and recycle water as far as possible, in accordance with
applicable rules and regulations provides further motivation to
address the lack of conservation behavior especially at work.
This process should include on site water conservation which
is critical as it helps to reduce the amount of water used
and to contribute to the sustainable use of water. In other
words, water conservation can be employed at all levels in the
organization (top to bottom) to ensure the conventional use of
water during drought and other times when water is in short
supply. Employees can integrate water saving behaviors which
could set environmental sustainability norms and perceptions
within the workplaces. Such set of norms and perceptions
could generate environmental conduct and awareness, which
eventually could build environmental values toward sustainable
utilization of resources (Pooley and O’Connor, 2000); in this case
water resources.
Research on environmental values has also illustrated gender
differences in explaining the behavior toward natural resources.
Boeve-de Pauw et al. (2012) described environmental values as
“how people view the natural environment and their relationship
to it.” The most common explanations are based on socialization
theory (Zelezny et al., 2000) which posits that women have a
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
2
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681
Palamuleni et al.
Motivation to Conserve Water at Work
necessary conditions which are capabilities (C), opportunities
(O), and motivation (M). The proximal determinants of
behavior are capability which encompasses the individual’s
psychological and physical capacity to engage in the activity
concerned. It includes having the necessary knowledge and
skills. Opportunity is defined as all the factors that lie
outside the individual that make the behavior possible or
prompt it (Michie et al., 2011). Motivation is defined as
all those brain processes that energize and direct behavior,
not just goals and conscious decision-making. It includes
habitual processes, emotional response, as well as analytical
decision-making. However, voluntary behavioral change must be
accompanied by information messages and/or communication
about water conservation. Addo et al. (2019) recognizes that the
communication of conservation messages encourages behavioral
changes that result in sustainable water conservation. The
contents of such communications must be framed with messages
for water-conservation behavior.
The theoretical argument of COM-B theory is grounded
on the notion that a person’s mechanism of changing behavior
depends on the psychological–social factors of capability,
opportunity, and motivation. This study focuses on the
motivation dimension of the COM-B theory to assess the
associations between sociodemographic characteristics of
Managers and water conservation behavior. The motivation
dimension comprises of intrinsic and extrinsic factors to an
individual that direct behavior. Embedded in the motivation
dimension are two sub-types namely: reflective and automatic
motivation. Reflective motivation involves beliefs about what
is good and bad, conscious intentions, decisions and plans
(Michie et al., 2011) of the behavior (e.g., a Manager intending
to be conscious of the amount of water use in each day).
Automatic motivation involves emotional reactions, desires
(wants/needs), inhibitions and reflex responses which activate
or inhibit behavior, often resulting from associative learning
and physiological states (Michie et al., 2011) (e.g., lack of water
saving devices inhibiting water conservation at the workplace).
In essence, motivation dimension of the COM-B is a system for
linking behavioral conditions to specific types of behavior-change
interventions and policies (Michie et al., 2011).
The BCW framework and COM-B system have been
applied in several disciplines and contexts. Barker et al. (2016)
applied the COM-B model to identify the determinants of
behavioral planning on the part of audiologists; a potentially
important factor in encouraging long-term hearing-aid
use. The authors found that behavioral planning might be
more likely to occur if audiologists’ psychological capability,
physical and social opportunity, and reflective and automatic
motivation were addressed. Addo et al. (2019) applied the
BCW framework and COM-B system to examine the
effectiveness of messages related to household water use
on water scarcity and intentions to act. The authors found
that the message framed in terms of specific water-saving
tips/strategies were mediated by increasing households’
capacity (self-efficacy), opportunity and/or motivation
in water-conservation actions. The study concluded that
specific water-conservation strategies made available to
voluntarily perform numerous environmental behaviors such as
recycling, carpooling, or willingness to conserve water as an
initiative to natural resources management. In other words, there
is a growing body of literature highlighting pro-environmental
behavior in the workplace (Blok et al., 2015; Paillé and Raineri,
2015; Chakraborty et al., 2017; Robertson and Carleton, 2017;
Kukkonen et al., 2018).
However, there is a bias in literature where numerous
models have been produced to explain pro-environmental
behavior (PEB) in a domestic setting, but workplace behavior
is under-represented, and not fully understood (Blok et al.,
2015). Similarly, studies on PEB focusing on water resources
have tended to focus on households or private spheres with
minimum attention on the workplace. Although the studies
done on private or household PEB have produced important
findings, it is uncertain if the results of those studies can be
generalized to the workplace (Wesselink et al., 2017). Fatoki
(2019) noted that employed individuals spend a major part of
their time at work and; industrial and commercial activities
produce significantly more greenhouse gases emission than
homes. It is expected that PEB in the workplace will contribute
significantly to the minimization of the negative impact of
employee’s actions on the natural and built environment (Blok
et al., 2015). The gap exists due to the few studies that have
been conducted in explaining PEB, in this case motivation toward
water conservation, exclusively in the workplace. The present
study has focused on the Managers’ intentions and conscious
decisions to conserve water in the workplace by using the COMB theory.
Water conservation depicts behavior in response to situations
of water availability, water scarcity, demand and supply. In
the face of the negative impacts of climate change on water
resources in Iran, Pakmehr et al. (2021) noted that demand
appraisal and self-efficacy were significant predictors of problemfocused coping, which, in turn, influenced adaptation responses.
According to this view, people respond to various stimuli
that influence them to make decisions when consuming and
conserving water even at the workplace. Therefore, this study
assessed the response to water scarcity through behavioral
change among Managers at the workplace. Specifically, the study
objective was to evaluate water conservation behavior using
several motivation constructs designed to change bad habits (in
this case water wastage) to form better habits (that is water
conservation). Additionally, the study explored the variations
of behavioral change motivations toward water conservation
between male and female Managers.
Theoretical Framework: The BCW Theory
and COM-B System
The Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) model (Michie et al.,
2011), based on behavior change theory, contains three distinct
behavior conditions: capability, opportunity and motivation (the
COM-B dimensions). The COM-B theory is one of the most
recent behavior change models. According to Michie et al.
(2011), the COM-B model of behavior change postulates that
behavior (B) occurs as a result of interaction between three
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
3
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681
Palamuleni et al.
Motivation to Conserve Water at Work
Chi-square Pearson correlation analysis was used to describe
the relationships between constructs of reflective and automatic
motivation and water conservation behavior among managers
at NWU-Mahikeng. The strength of the relationships was
tested using Phi and Cramer’s V-tests. Relationships were
cross tabulated using gender as the independent variable and
motivation items as the dependent variable.
households have a stronger impact on water-conservation
behavior because these messages appeal to behavioral
change conditions.
The Current Study
The current study reports the results from a survey which sought
to determine the prevalence of and contributing factors toward
a water conservation mindset among managers at the NWUMahikeng Campus. The study area, located in the North-West
province of South Africa is located in a semi-arid environment
with rainfall of less than 400 mm/annum and experiences high
evapotranspiration rates. Water usage on the NWU-Mahikeng
Campus has remained steady at an average of 62.4 L per person
per day, exceeding the basic demand of 60 L of water per person
per day (Department of Water Sanitation., 2018). In contrast with
energy measurement and consumption, there are no mechanisms
to measure and monitor water usage within the institution.
The NWU physical infrastructure policy is silent about water
consumption and efficient usage (North West University, 2015).
The Department of Water Sanitation (2016), implemented
sectoral water conservation strategies focusing on not only
civic education, but also water saving initiatives such as the
use of low-flow showerheads, dual-flush toilet mechanisms,
and rebates for water efficiency certified appliances for both
residential and business customers. While these initiatives have
yielded plausible results, it is important to note that in public
institutions, resource conservation (water and energy) is based
on the individuals’ and the groups’ conservation attitude toward
public goods. This paper reports on the motivations surrounding
water conservation decisions and behavior among Managers
in response to water scarcity in the study area. Specifically, it
addresses one of the challenges faced by the water sector, namely
the balance between supply and demand, climate change and
variability which is compounded by the inefficient management
of water usage especially in the workplace. In this study, two
specific questions were addressed: (i) what factors motivate
Managers to conserve water at the workplace? (ii) Is there any
difference in the response to water scarcity between male and
female Managers?
The Target Respondents
For this study, a structured questionnaire was distributed
using survey monkey to 83 top level managers at NWU—
Mahikeng and 72 responded representing a total response rate
of 87%. The total number of respondents that participated in
the survey were eight managers from the support cluster and
64 managers from the academic cluster. Academic top-level
managers included Deans, Deputy Deans, Directors, Deputy
Directors and Subject Chairs from the six faculties of the NWUMahikeng and the Directors and Deputy Directors of research
entities while the key support sections included: People and
Culture (employee relations section), Finance and Facilities, and
Research Support. These respondents were purposively chosen
as respondents in their capacity as high-level decision makers.
Managers are responsible for getting things done through people
and other resources; they are involved in planning and assigning
work to others, monitoring their performance, coaching,
problem-solving, re-solving disputes as well as influencing work
behavior (McIntosh and Luecke, 2011). It is perceived that
Managers are role models and their behavior can influence
the ethical conduct and prosocial behavior of employees
through motivation and support (Fatoki, 2019). For employees,
PEB is voluntary and Managers can transfer organizational
cultures to employees through social exchange, motivation and
encouragement (Wesselink et al., 2017), as propagated by the
social learning theory (Bandura, 1977), the majority of human
behavior is learned through modeling. Therefore, acceptable
behavior is learned by subordinates through interaction with and
emulation of their role models, usually leaders (Fatoki, 2019).
Data Analysis
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Reliability of Measuring Instrument
Reliability in research is a measure of quality in quantitative
studies to assess the accuracy of the instrument. In other words,
the extent to which a research instrument consistently has the
same results if it is used in the same situation on repeated
occasions (Heale and Twycross, 2015). In this study, reliability
and internal consistency have been tested by using Cronbach’s
Alpha, an arithmetic operation which is used to assess the
reliability or internal consistency of a set of test items (Cronbach,
1951). Cronbach Alpha coefficient assesses reliability and the
higher the alpha coefficient, the more the items of the instrument
are said to be reliable. However, some scholars have documented
that an Alpha coefficient of possibly at least 0.7 is equally reliable
(Vaus de, 2002; Yong and Pearce, 2013). In this study, the
Cronbach Alpha coefficient for the subscales were reported as
0.83 for the motivation items.
The main purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence
of and factors contributing to a water conservation behavior
among managers at the North-West University—Mahikeng
Campus. The study explored if Manager’s conscious intentions,
beliefs, and emotional reactions about water conservation are
based on gender. A quantitative cross-sectional design was
adopted through a survey questionnaire with selected senior
management in their capacity as high level decision makers. This
study used the motivation dimension of the Behavior Change
Wheel, COM-B framework to review reflective and automatic
motivations associated with water conservation behavior at
the work place. A list of eight questions were presented to
respondents and the respondents had to pick multiple responses
to reflect their opinion. A correlational research design using
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
4
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681
Palamuleni et al.
Motivation to Conserve Water at Work
To assess the motivation dimension of the COM-B system,
frequency tables were drawn and further cross tabulated
to describe and estimate the relationships between reflective
and automatic motivation constructs and water conservation
behavior. Chi-square Pearson correlations were utilized to test
the statistical significance of any observed relationships. Only
cases that fulfilled the additional assumption concerning the
“minimum expected cell frequency,” which should be 5 or
greater (Pallant, 2005; Saunders et al., 2007), were included in
the analysis.
TABLE 1 | Motivation inclinations of managers toward water conservation in the
workplace (N = 72).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Characteristics of the Respondents
The majority of the respondents (61.1%) were male, while 38.9%
were females; the majority were Subject Chairs or Heads of
Departments (43.1%), whereas only 9.7% were Deans and Deputy
Deans. In terms of the post level category, more than 88.9%
of the respondents were from the academic sector, with only
11.1% respondents occupying a position in the support sector
of the university. With regard to the number of service years on
the Mahikeng Campus, the majority (50.0%) of the respondents
served in management for a period of 5 years and longer,
holding different portfolios. Only 11.1% had been involved in
management for about 1 year.
Overall Motivation Dimension and Water
Conservation
In terms of workplace water-use behavior outcomes, the study
measured workplace water conservation (e.g., responsibility,
consciousness, desire, intentions, and beliefs). A range of
predictor inclinations were revealed using the motivation
dimension of the COM-B framework. Respondents reported
that both reflective and automatic motivation played a role in
determining the likelihood of them conserving water at the
workplace. Table 1 shows the prevalence of motivation predictors
and inhibitors toward water conservation at the workplace.
In terms of the motivation constructs involving emotional
reactions, desires (wants and needs), impulses, reflex responses,
and habits (Chandlert and Kapelner, 2013), some of the
respondents (88.9%) reported being more motivated by the
inherent satisfaction and desire to purposely conserve water
whenever and wherever they can (M = 0.89; SD = 0.316). Results
in Table 1 show that 83.3% of the respondents believe that “it
is everyone’s responsibility to conserve water for the future”
(M = 0.83; SD = 0.375). For the motivation construct of “it
is everyone’s responsibility to conserve water for the future,”
the response pattern of the respondents suggests that water
conservation activity is undertaken out of interest, enjoyment,
or inherent satisfaction (Chandlert and Kapelner, 2013). These
results are consistent with previous research which suggested that
the more individuals perceive their activities as a moral obligation
to save for future generations, the greater the intention will be to
engage in a high level of conservation (Boazar et al., 2019); in
this case water conservation behavior. Having the perception of a
moral responsibility to conserve water for the future, could be a
motivating factor to respond to water scarcity and achieve water
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
Scale and item
Mean
SD
Frequency
Percent
I conserve water
whenever and
wherever I can
0.89
0.316
64
88.9
It is everyone’s
responsibility to
conserve water for the
future
0.83
0.375
60
83.3
It pays to save water
around the Campus
0.56
0.500
40
55.6
It is good to be
conscious of the
amount of water used
in each day
0.56
0.500
40
55.6
It is advisable to use
quality water-efficient
appliances
0.50
0.504
36
50.0
I lack environmental
values and
conservation attitudes
0.39
0.491
28
38.9
It is impractical for me
to conserve water
0.22
0.419
16
22.2
Lack of motivation
affects my
water-conservation
behavior
0.17
0.375
12
16.7
conservation behavioral change. Thus, if individuals believe that
engaging in water conservation behaviors is a wise, necessary,
and beneficial act and derive pleasure and satisfaction from doing
so, they likely have more intention to adopt water conservation
behaviors (Shahangia et al., 2021).
Some of the respondents (55.6%) reported being motivated
to conserve water because “it pays to save water around the
campus” (M = 0.56; SD = 0.500) while a similar percentage
reported being motivated by their conscious about the amount
they use per day (55.6%; M = 0.56; SD = 0.500). Some of the
respondents (50%) perceive that it is advisable to use waterefficient appliances (M = 0.50; SD =0.504); which could be
a motivating factor toward water conservation behavior. Our
findings suggest possible high emotional reactions toward water
conservation and positive behavioral change being influenced
by conscious “feel good” outcome; majority of the respondents
are committed to water conservation and perceive that water
conservation is their responsibility. The Managers are concerned
with water scarcity in the study area and therefore exhibit habits
and desires toward conservation. De Young (1996) argued that
participating in environmental action can allow one to gain a
sense of satisfaction and an inner sense of wellbeing, alongside
a belief that society is benefiting from one’s behavior. Previous
studies have shown that utilizing water efficient appliances,
water-efficient behaviors are promoted which in turn translates
to water conservation in all aspects (Shahangia et al., 2021).
Fielding et al. (2012) and Englart and Jedlikowski (2019) reported
5
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681
Palamuleni et al.
Motivation to Conserve Water at Work
consistent with the socialization theory which places men as less
likely to engage in water conservation. Similarly, Kollmuss and
Agyeman (2002), Saphores et al. (2012), and Tong et al. (2017)
noted that women are more inclined toward environmentally
friendly behavior compared to men.
A significant positive correlation was also observed between
the motivation construct “it is everyone’s responsibility to
conserve water for the future” and water conservation behavior
and gender (χ 2 = 9.164, r = 0.357, p = <0.05). For this
motivation construct, the response pattern from the crosstabulations showed that the majority of the females compared to
the males perceive that it is everyone’s responsibility to conserve
water for the future. This finding is consistent with the study
by Hablemitoglu and Ozmete (2010), which reported found
that water conservation consciousness is more prevalent among
females than males because of past experiences and memories
of hard times of water shortage and inconvenience of collecting
water. Having experienced water scarcity through first-hand
experience of having no water on campus, probably for personal
women hygiene, females exhibit concerns about water scarcity
and are more likely to conserve water for the future.
that the total replacement of domestic appliances with waterefficient ones can save water 35–50% or even more; while
Shahangia et al. (2021) found that intention to conserve water
had a direct and positive relationship with an individual’s waterefficiency behavior. Addo et al. (2018), noted that lack of water
infrastructure and resources are perceived impediments to water
conservation behavior.
Additionally, from the results in Table 1 38.9% (M = 0.39; SD
= 0.491) of the respondents indicated that “I lack environmental
values and conservation attitudes” as one of the inhibitors of
water conservation in the workplace. The emotional and reflex
reactions toward water conservation at work elicited low mean
scores toward water conservation as a response to opinions that
“it is impractical for one to conserve water in the workplace”
(22.2%; M = 0.22; SD = 0.419); lack of motivation affects my
water conservation behavior (16.7%; M = 0.17; SD = 0.375).
The lower mean scores for these negatively worded motivation
constructs suggest that majority of the respondents (83.3%) are
motivated to engage in water conservation behavior; 77.8% of
the managers perceive that it is practical for one to conserve
water in the workplace and 61.1% have environmental values and
conservation attitudes.
THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL
IMPLICATIONS
Gender Variations Toward Water
Conservation in the Workplace
Water conservation behavior in the workplace is an issue that
needs to be addressed urgently and efficiently as a response to
the implications of climate change and variability. This is true
particularly in water scarce areas. Persistent water shortages and
problems, may require not only technical interventions but also
behavioral change to ensure sustainability of water resources.
Noticeable features of water conservation motivation constructs
were reported by an increased score revealing that organizations
can make better use of the Managers’ inherent and conscious
intentions in promoting pro-environmental behavior at work.
This study has demonstrated the existence of relationships
between gender and behavior pertaining to water conservation.
On that basis, when implementing water conservation activities,
Managers should consider incorporating strategies that might
trigger positive motivations to conserve water in the workplace.
The study has also shown that one of the key issues
impeding motivation toward water conservation is the
lack of environmental values and conservation attitudes
more among males compared to females. To support high
levels of engagement with water conservation beliefs among
Managers, institutions may therefore consider socialization
programs and environmental education aimed at encouraging
conscious intentions and decisions to conserve water in
the workplace. This finding means that improving and
deepening one’s understanding of water scarcity issues might
lead to more environmental responsible behavior and thus
a higher motivation to conserve water (Seelena et al., 2019).
Neerachand (2014), noted that environmental education
programs are major variables that need to be considered
for ensuring the understanding, awareness and successful
implementation of water conservation. Education about
To assess the relationships between gender and the behavioral
variables (motivations) and water conservation among the
Managers, Chi Square Pearson correlation was employed. In this
study, Managers’ gender is categorized as male or female. Various
Chi-square-based measures were used to detect the strength of
the relationship between the test variables, the tests included
the Chi-square test, Phi and Cramer’s V. The significance level
for this analysis is 5% alpha level or P = 0.05, whereby the
relationship is considered significant if the output statistics gave
a significance level of P ≤ 0.05. Table 2 shows that the results of
three constructs, “it is impractical for me to conserve water,” “I
lack environmental values and conservation attitudes,” and “it is
everyone’s responsibility to conserve water for the future” were
statistically significant.
Pearson Chi-square correlation values show the relationship
while the Phi and Cramer’s V-values shows the strength of
association between the constructs and gender. Significant
association was found between the motivation inhibitor
construct of it is impractical for me to conserve water and water
conservation behavior and gender (χ 2 = 13.091, r = −0.426,
p = <0.05). The cross-tabulation results revealed that the
majority of the male respondents compared to female
respondents had the view that it is impractical for them to
conserve water in the workplace. These results suggest that
females are more likely to conserve water in the workplace as
they perceive no impediment to do so. I lack environmental
values and conservation attitudes as a motivation inhibitor
construct of water conservation and gender (χ 2 = 11.670, r =
−0.403, p = <0.05). The cross-tabulation results pointed out
that the majority of the females compared to the males have
environmental values an conservation attitudes. These results are
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
6
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681
Palamuleni et al.
Motivation to Conserve Water at Work
TABLE 2 | Correlation analysis—gender and water conservation motivation.
Variables
Pearson Chi-square
Value
df
Phi and Cramer’s V
p-value
Value
p-value
It is impractical for me to conserve water
13.091
1
0.000
−0.426
0.000
I lack environmental values and conservation attitudes
11.670
1
0.001
−0.403
0.001
It is everyone’s responsibility to conserve water for the future
9.164
1
0.002
0.357
0.002
It pays to save water around the Campus
2.992
1
0.084
0.204
0.084
It is good to be conscious of the amount of water used in each day
2.992
1
0.084
0.204
0.084
I conserve water whenever and wherever I can
0.468
1
0.494
0.081
0.494
It is an offense not installing water-efficient appliances within the
Campus and garden
0.468
1
0.494
0.081
0.494
Lack of motivation affects my water-conservation behavior
0.187
1
0.665
0.051
0.665
climate change and related water resources implications
could allow individuals to acquire new knowledge and
experiences which can be reflected in generating behavioral
transformations. We agree with Middlestadt et al. (2001),
who admitted that provided the correct education is
given, recipients are more likely to change their behavior
and drive conservation of natural resources (in this case
water resources).
In addition, the results of this study hold a number of
implications for public and private institutions that are interested
in promoting water conservation in the workplace. Given
the threat of water scarcity associated with climate change
and unsustainable use of water resources, institutions have to
promote water conservation behavior among top level Managers
and trickled down to the employees. The promotion of gender
policies is recommended to increase male socialization in order
to bridge the existing gaps with a view to increasing motivations
toward water conservation behavior.
To explain water conservation behaviors in the workplace,
we tested the motivation arm of the COM-B theory, as it
was overlooked till to-date in water resources management
literature. The COM-B dimensions not only increase behavioral
propensity and resilience, but also enable individuals and
households to promote and sustain behavioral and attitudinal
change toward pro-environmental behavior. This study
contributes to the COM-B literature by extending it to include
organizational citizenship behaviors like pro-environmentalism
and psycho-socialization such as “motivation.” The leadership
role of managers in citizenship behavior is responsible for
motivating employees to engage in pro-environmental
behavior, in this case water conservation behavior in
the workplace.
Previous studies of water resource management and
conservation, particularly in South Africa, have been limited
to water pollution, institutional platforms governing water
use, and water demand management (Van Koppen and
Schreiner, 2014; Pahlow et al., 2015; Agunbiade and Moodley,
2016). However, the demand for water and the consumption
patterns continue to rise amid the challenges of increased
population, economic growth and dwindling supplies due
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
to overexploitation, pollution and climate change. Lessons
drawn from this study will generate and add to the scholarly
body of knowledge and information about obstacles and
perceived contributing factors toward water conservation in
the workplace. The study also expands the scope of behavioral
interventions to settings where the consumption of natural
resources is perceived as a right to public goods. This is a
first step toward the development of effective intervention
programs for water wastage reduction in workplaces. Since
the results of this study deals with the critical connections
between water conservation and behavioral change especially
in the workplace, the insight portrayed by the findings will
result in recommendations in designing policy interventions
aimed at reducing the unfavorable effects of unsustainable water
uses. Ultimately, strategies to encourage pro-environmental
behavior as a response to water scarcity among Managers in high
education institutions could be enhanced. Such developments
are needed for sustainable water resources management if the
Sustainable Development Goal number 6 of the United Nations
are to be realized (United Nations World Water Assessment
Programme, 2018).
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
A quantitative cross-sectional research approach was employed.
Questionnaires were administered through an online platform,
due to Covid-19 restrictions. This type of research approach
did not allow probing respondents into their behavioral
intentions, i.e., why the Managers behave in a particular
way toward water conservation in the workplace. Although
effort have been made through this study to determine the
motivational factors toward water conservation behavior
among Managers at the workplace, the study has unearthed
a number of issues that require further research. The
current study was cross-sectional, which means that it took
a snapshot of the situation regarding behavioral change in
the workplace. A longitudinal study can be done to examine
behavioral change if water-efficient appliances were to be
implemented in the workplace to enhance utilization of water
saving technologies.
7
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681
Palamuleni et al.
Motivation to Conserve Water at Work
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Additionally, one dimension of the COM-B framework
was adopted for this study. Therefore, future studies should
consider incorporating all the three dimensions i.e., capability,
opportunity, and motivation to identify the barriers and drivers
of water conservation as a response to water scarcity and
impending climate change implications.
LP conceptualized the research, collected data, formal analysis,
wrote the original draft, and editing. YP supervised the
research process, reviewed, and edited the draft manuscript.
RB contributed in methodology, formal and statistical
analysis, reviewed, and edited the draft manuscript.
All authors contributed to the article and approved the
submitted version.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The original contributions presented in the study are included
in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be
directed to the corresponding author.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the research grant received
in 2020–2021 from the North-West University in partial support
of the study for LP. We equally express our profound gratitude
to the reviewers, whose constructive views and comments have
tremendously improved the quality of this manuscript.
ETHICS STATEMENT
Ethics review and approval/written informed consent was not
required as per local legislation and institutional requirements.
REFERENCES
Cudmore, T. (2015). Delivering Workplace Pro-Environmental Behaviour Change
Using Evidence-Based Practice. Available online at: https://www.dmu.ac.
uk/documents/technology-documents/research/iesd/dissertations/2015/
tcudmore-tom-cudmore-dissertation-engt5304-2015-x.pdf (accessed May 7,
2022).
De Young, R. (1996). Some psychological aspects of reduced consumption
behaviour: the role of intrinsic motivation and competence motivation. Environ
Behav. 28, 358–409. doi: 10.1177/0013916596283005
Department of Water and Sanitation (2016). National Sanitation Policy: National
Department of Water and Sanitation, Pretoria, Republic of South Africa,
Pretoria.
Department of Water and Sanitation. (2018). Strategic Overview of the Water Sector
in South Africa, May 2018 DWS Directorate: Water Services Macro Planning,
Pretoria, 9.
Dietz, T., Kalof, L., and Stern, P. C. (2002). Gender, values, and environmentalism.
Soc. Sci. Q. 83:88. doi: 10.1111/1540-6237.00088
Dinar, A., Pochat, V., and Albiac-Murillo, J. (2015). :Introduction,”
in Water Pricing Experiences and Innovations, eds A. Dinar, V.
Pochat, and J. Albiac-Murillo (Cham: Springer, Switzerland), 1–12.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-16465-6_1
Eagly, A. (1987). Gender Differences in Social Behaviour: A Social Role
Interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Englart, S., and Jedlikowski, A. (2019). The influence of different
water efficiency ratings of taps and mixers on energy and water
consumption in buildings. SN Appl. Sci. 1:525. doi: 10.1007/s42452-0190539-8
FAO (2007). Coping With Water Scarcity - Challenge of the Twenty-First Century.
Available online at: www.worldwaterday07.org (accessed May 28, 2020).
Fatoki, O. (2019). Hotel employees’ pro-environmental behaviour: effect
of leadership behaviour, institutional support and workplace spirituality.
Sustainability 11:4135. doi: 10.3390/su11154135
Fielding, K. S., Russell, S., Spinks, A., and Mankad, A. (2012). Determinants
of household water conservation: the role of demographic, infrastructure,
behaviour, and psychosocial variables. Water Resour. Res. 48:W10510.
doi: 10.1029/2012WR012398
Hablemitoglu, S., and Ozmete, E. (2010). Sustainable water management: a case
study on behaviour of Turkish women for domestic water usage. Eur. J. Soc.
Sci. 12, 447–466.
Heale, R., and Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies.
Evid Based Nurs. 18, 66–67. doi: 10.1136/eb-2015-102129
Klein, B., Kenney, D., Lowery, J., and Goemans, C. (2006). Factors Influencing
Residential Water Demand: A Review of Literature, Western Water Assessment,
Colorado State, Colorado. Available online at: http://sciencepolicy.colorado.
edu/admin/publication_files/2006.28.pdf.
Addo, I. B., Thoms,. M. C., and Parsons, M. (2018). Barriers and drivers of
household water-conservation behaviour: a profiling approach. Water 10:1794.
doi: 10.3390/w10121794
Addo, I. B., Thoms,. M. C., and Parsons, M. (2019). The influence of waterconservation messages on reducing household water use. Appl. Water Sci. 9:126.
doi: 10.1007/s13201-019-1002-0
Agunbiade, F. O., and Moodley, B. (2016). Occurrence and distribution pattern
of acidic pharmaceuticals in surface water, wastewater, and sediment of the
Msunduzi River, Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 35,
36–46. doi: 10.1002/etc.3144
Aprile, C. M., and Fiorillo, D. (2017). Water conservation behavior and
environmental concerns: evidence from a representative sample of Italian
individuals. J. Clean. Prod. 159, 119–129. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.036
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Barker, F., Atkins, L., and de Lusignan, S. (2016). Applying the COM-B behaviour
model and behaviour change wheel to develop an intervention to improve
hearing aid use in adult auditory rehabilitation. Int. J. Audiol. 55(Suppl.3),
S90–S98. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1120894
Blok, V., Wesselink, R., Studynka, O., and Kemp, R. (2015). Encouraging
sustainability in the workplace the pro-environmental behaviour of university
employees. J. Clean. Prod. 106, 55–67. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.07.063
Boazar, M., Yazdanpanah, M., and Abdeshahi, A. (2019). Response to water
crisis: how do Iranian farmers think about and intent in relation to
switching from rice to less water-dependent crops? J. Hydrol. 570, 523–530.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.01.021
Boeve-de Pauw, J., Jacobs, K., and Van Petegem, P. (2012). Gender differences in
environmental values: an issue of measurement? Environ. Behav. 46, 373–397.
doi: 10.1177/0013916512460761
Chakraborty, A., Singh, M. P., and Roy, M. (2017). A study of goal frames shaping
pro-environmental behaviour in university students. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ.
18, 00–00. doi: 10.1108/IJSHE-10-2016-0185
Chandlert, D., and Kapelner, A. (2013). Breaking monotony with meaning:
motivation in crowdsourcing markets. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 90, 123–133.
doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2013.03.003
Clarke, J. M., and Brown, R. R. (2006). Understanding the factors that influence
domestic water consumption within Melbourne. Australas. J. Water Resour. 10,
251–258. doi: 10.1080/13241583.2006.11465301
Cole, S. K. G., Mullor, E. C., Ma, Y., and Sandang, Y. (2020). Tourism, water,
and gender”—an international review of an unexplored nexus, WIREs. Water
7:e1442. doi: 10.1002/wat2.1442
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.
Psychometrika 16, 297–334. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
8
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681
Palamuleni et al.
Motivation to Conserve Water at Work
Schultz, P. W. (2001). The structure of environmental concern: concern for
self, other people and the biosphere. J. Environ. Psychol. 21, 327–339.
doi: 10.1006/jevp.2001.0227
Seelena, L. M. S., Flaim, G., Jennings, E., and De Senerpont-Domis, L. N. (2019).
Saving water for the future: public awareness of water usage and water quality.
J. Environ. Manage. 242, 246–257. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.047
Shahangia, S. A., Tabesh, M., and Yazdanpanah, M. (2021). How can sociopsychological factors be related to water-efficiency intention and behaviours
among Iranian residential water consumers? J. Environ. Manage. 288:112466.
doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112466
Singha, B., and Eljamal, O. (2021). “Exploring attitudes and household culture
to encourage water conservation behaviour,” in Proceeding of International
Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering & Sciences (IEICES) 7,
Kyushu University. Japan. Fukuoka. doi: 10.5109/4738581
Steg, L., and Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An
integrative review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 29, 309–317.
doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004
Tong, Y., Fan, L., and Niu, H. (2017). Water conservation awareness and practices
in households receiving improved water supply: a gender-based analysis. J.
Clean. Prod. 141, 947–955. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.169
United Nations World Water Assessment Programme (2018). The United
Nations World Water Development Report 2018: Nature-based Solutions.
Paris: UNESCO.
Van Koppen, B., and Schreiner, B. (2014). Moving beyond integrated water
resource management: developmental water management in South Africa. Int.
J. Water Resour. Dev. 30, 543–558. doi: 10.1080/07900627.2014.912111
Vaus de, D. (2002). Analyzing Social Science Data: 50 Key Problems in Data
Analysis, London, SAGE Publications Ltd.
Wesselink, R., Blok, V., and Ringersma, J. (2017). Pro-environmental behaviours
in the workplace and the role of managers and organisation. J. Clean. Prod. 168,
1679–1687. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.214
Willis, R. M., Stewart, R. A., Panuwatwanich, K., Williams, P. R., and
Hollingsworth, A. L. (2011). Quantifying the influence of environmental
and water conservation attitudes on household end use water consumption.
J. Environ. Manage. 92, 1996–2009. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.
03.023
Yong, A. G., and Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: focusing
on exploratory factor analysis. Tutor. Quant. Methods Psychol. 9, 79–94.
doi: 10.20982/tqmp.09.2.p079
Yuriev, A., Boiral, O., Francoeur, V., and Paill, P. (2018). Overcoming the barriers
to pro-environmental behaviors in the workplace: A systematic review. J. Clean.
Prod. 182, 379–394. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.041
Zelezny, L. C., Chua, P.-P., and Aldrich, C. (2000). Elaborating on
gender differences in environmentalism. J. Soc. Iss. 56, 443–457.
doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00177
Zietlow, K. J., Michalscheck, M., and Weltin, M. (2016). Water conservation under
scarcity conditions: testing the long-run effectiveness of a water conservation
awareness campaign in Jordan. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 32, 997–1009.
doi: 10.1080/07900627.2016.1159947
Kollmuss, A., and Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act
environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour?
Environ. Educ. Res. 8, 239–260. doi: 10.1080/13504620220145401
Kukkonen, J., Kärkkäinen, S., and Keinonen, T. (2018). Examining the
relationships between factors influencing environmental behaviour among
university students. Sustainability 10:4294. doi: 10.3390/su10114294
Law, M. M. S., Hills, P., and Hau, B. C. H. (2017). Engaging employees
in sustainable development—a case study of environmental education
and awareness training in Hong Kong. Bus. Strategy Environ. 26, 84–97.
doi: 10.1002/bse.1903
Lee, E., Park, N. K., and Han, J. H. (2013). Gender difference in environmental
attitude and behaviors in adoption of energy-efficient lighting at home. J.
Sustain. Dev. 6:36. doi: 10.5539/jsd.v6n9p36
Lin, S-T., and Niu, H-J. (2018). Green consumption: environmental knowledge,
environmental consciousness, social norms, and purchasing behaviour. Bus.
Strat. Environ. 27, 1679–1688. doi: 10.1002/bse.2233
Martínez-Espiñeira, R., and García-Valiñas, M. Á. (2013). Adopting
versus adapting: adoption of water-saving technology versus water
conservation habits in Spain. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 29, 400–414.
doi: 10.1080/07900627.2012.721695
McIntosh, P., and Luecke, R. (2011). Becoming a Manager. New York, NY: AMA
Self-Study.
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., and West, R. (2011). The behaviour change wheel: a
new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions.
Implement. Sci. 6, 1–12. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-42
Middlestadt, S., Griesser, M., Herndandez, O., Tubaishat, K., Sanchack, J.,
Southwell, B., et al. (2001). Turning minds on and faucets off: water
conservation education in Jordanian Schools. J Environ Educ. 32, 37–45.
doi: 10.1080/00958960109599136
Neerachand, Y. (2014). Assessing the Perceptions of Water Conservation Among
Informal Settlements Through a Case Study of the Mpolweni Informal
Settlement, Reservoir Hills, Durban, South Africa. (MSoc Sc Dissertation),
School of Agriculture, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of
KwaZulu Natal, Durban, South Africa.
North West University (2015). Policy on Physical Infrastructure. Available
online at: http://www.nwu.ac.za/sites/www.nwu.ac.za/files/files/i-governancemanagement/policy/5P-5.1_Infrastructure%20Policy_e.pdf (accessed March
11, 2020).
Pahlow, M., Snowball, J., and Fraser, G. (2015). Water footprint assessment to
inform water management and policy making in South Africa. Water SA 41,
300–313. doi: 10.4314/wsa.v41i3.02
Paillé, P., and Raineri, N. (2015). Linking perceived corporate environmental
policies and employees’ eco-initiatives: The influence of perceived
organizational support and psychological contract breach. J. Bus. Res. 68,
2404–2411. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.02.021
Pakmehr, S., Yazdanpanah, M., and Baradaran, M. (2021). Explaining farmers’
response to climate change-induced water stress through cognitive theory
of stress: an Iranian perspective. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 23:5776–5793.
doi: 10.1007/s10668-020-00846-3
Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS Survival Manual. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Pooley, J. A., and O’Connor, M. (2000). Environmental education and attitudes:
emotions and beliefs are what is needed. Environ. Behav. 32, 711–723.
doi: 10.1177/0013916500325007
Robertson, J., and Carleton, E. (2017). Uncovering how and when environmental
leadership affects employees’ voluntary pro-environmental behaviour. J.
Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 25, 197–210. doi: 10.1177/1548051817738940
Rodell, M., Famiglietti, J. S., Wiese, D. N., Reager, J. T., Beaudoing, H. K., Landerer,
F. W., et al. (2018). Emerging trends in global freshwater availability. Nature
557, 651–659. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0123-1
Rouault, M., and Richard, Y. (2003). Intensity and spatial extension of
drought in South Africa at different time scales. Water SA 29, 489–500.
doi: 10.4314/wsa.v29i4.5057
Saphores, J.-D. M., Ogunseitan, A. O., and Shapiro, A. A. (2012). Willingness
to engage in a pro-environmental behaviour: an analysis of e-waste recycling
based on a national survey of U.S. Households. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 60,
49–63. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.12.003
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business
Students. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Frontiers in Water | www.frontiersin.org
Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s Note: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of
the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in
this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
endorsed by the publisher.
Copyright © 2022 Palamuleni, Plessis and Bakuwa. This is an open-access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the
original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these
terms.
9
June 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 930681