The urban water and sanitation system has been questioned from various sustainability perspectives but, like other large technical systems, it is highly path dependent and resistant to change. The response to environmental demands is typically to optimize existing technology and procedures, adding new system-compatible technology, and to introduce policy instruments to improve water use by households. However, these policy instruments are general measures that touch on everyday life in various household contexts. Despite the geographical extension of water and sanitation networks, any policy instrument or systemic change will be interpreted and understood in local contexts, and users in households act locally. Nevertheless, conceptual discussion of the interconnectedness of system design, household context, and user routines is lacking. This article aims to provide a conceptual model combining systems and everyday-life views in the same framework. The model is applied to the concrete Swedish example of phosphorous recycling from wastewater.
AkrichM. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects. In BijkerW. E.LawJ. (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 205-224). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
AllonF.SofoulisZ. (2006). Everyday water: Cultures in transition. Australian Geographer, 37(1), 45-55.
3.
AnderssonP.-G. (2009). Slamspridning på åkermark: Fältförsök med kommunalt avloppsslam från Malmö och Lund under åren 1981-2008 [Spreading of sludge on farmland: Field trials with municipal wastewater sludge from Malmö and Lund, 1981-2008] (Hushållningssällskapet No. 2009:15). Bjärred, Sweden: Hushållningssällskapet Malmöhus.
4.
Avgiftsgruppen. (2005). Jubileumsutgåva av avgiftsrapport Nils Holgersson 1996-2005 [Jubilee edition of the fee report, Nils Holgersson 1996-2005]. Stockholm, Sweden: Author.
5.
Avgiftsgruppen. (2009). Fastigheten Nils Holgerssons underbara resa genom Sverige: En avgiftsstudie för år 2009 [The wonderful adventures of the property Nils Holgersson: a study of fees for 2009]. Stockholm, Sweden: Author.
ChappellsH. (2003). Re-conceptualising electricity and water: Institutions, infrastructures and the construction of demand. Lancaster, UK: Lancaster University Press.
8.
ChappellsH.MeddW. (2008). From big solutions to small practices: Bringing back the active consumer. Social Alternatives, 27(3), 44-49.
9.
de LaetM.MolA. (2000). The Zimbabwe bush pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology. Social Studies of Science, 30, 225-263.
10.
DouglasM. (1984). Purity and danger: An analysis of the concepts of pollution and taboo. London, UK: ARK Paperbacks. (Original work published 1966)
11.
DrangertJ.-O.KrantzH. (2002). Hammarby Sjöstad: Miljöföreställningar och verkligheter [Hammarby Sjöstad: residents’ environmental perceptions and realities]. Vatten, 58(2), 89-95.
12.
DrangertJ.-O.NelsonM. C.NilssonH. (2002). Why did they become pipe-bound cities? Early water and sewerage alternatives in Swedish cities. Public Works Management & Policy, 6(3), 172-185.
GybergP.PalmJ. (2008). Tillförsel och brukare: Diskursiv kamp på den kommunala arenan [Supply and users: A discursive struggle in the municipal arena]. In PalmJ.EllegårdK. (Eds.), Vardagsteknik: Energi och IT. Forskning om hållbar användning av samhällets IT-och energisystem (pp. 57-82). Stockholm, Sweden: Carlssons.
15.
HägerstrandT. (1985). Time-geography: Focus on the corporeality of man, society, and environment. In AidaS.. (Eds.), The science and praxis of complexity (pp. 193-216). New York, NY: The United Nations University.
16.
HeggerD. (2007). Greening sanitary systems: An end-user perspective. Wageningen, Netherlands: Wageningen University Press.
17.
HillM. (2007). Policyprocessen [The public policy process]. Malmö, Sweden: Liber AB.
18.
HobsonK. (2003). Consumption, environmental sustainability and human geography in Australia: A missing research agenda?Australian Geographical Studies, 41(2), 148-155.
19.
HughesT. P. (1983). Networks of power: Electrification in Western society 1880-1930. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
20.
HughesT. P. (1986). The seamless web: Technology, science, etcetera, etcetera. Social Studies of Science, 16(2), 281-292.
21.
JohanssonM. (2008). Barriärer och broar: Kommunikativa villkor i det svenska miljömålsarbetet [Barriers and bridges: Communicative conditions within the Swedish environmental objectives implementation process]. Linköping, Sweden: Linköping University Press.
22.
KrantzH. (2005). Matter that matters: A study of household routines in a process of changing water and sanitation arrangements. Linköping, Sweden: Linköping University Press.
23.
LieM.SörensenK. H. (Eds.). (1996). Making technology our own? Domesticating technology into everyday life. Oslo, Norway: Scandinavian University Press.
24.
MacauleyD. (2005). The domestication of water: Filtering nature through technology. Essays in Philosophy, 6(1), Article 23. Retrieved from http://commons.pacificu.edu/eip/vol6/iss1/23
25.
MalmqvistP.-A.KärrmanE.RydhagenB. (2006). Evaluation of the ReVAQ project to achieve safe use of wastewater sludge in agriculture. Water Science and Technology, 54(11-12), 129-135.
26.
Miljömålsrådet. (2010). Miljömålsportalen [Environmental objectives portal]. Retrieved from http://www.miljomal.nu/
27.
NorströmA.MalmqvistP.-A.PetterssonF.SvenssonG.WittgrenH.-B. (2011). Systemanalys av kretsloppssystem för Norra Djurgårdsstaden, Stockholm [Systems analysis of wastewater recycling systems for Norra Djurgårdsstaden, Stockholm] (Unpublished manuscript). Göteborg, Sweden: CIT Urban Water Management AB.
28.
PalmJ.WihlborgE. (2007). Hur kan kommuner styra sociotekniska system? Exempel från bredband och energisystemen [How can municipalities govern sociotechnical systems? Examples from the broadband and energy systems]. Linköping, Sweden: Department of Thematic Studies—Technology and Social Change, Linköping University.
29.
Proposition 2005/06:105. Trygga konsumenter som handlar hållbart: Konsumentpolitikens mål och inriktning [Safe consumers acting sustainably: objectives and direction of consumer policy]. Retrieved from http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/06/02/48/e6eb50f1.pdf
ShoveE. (2003). Comfort, cleanliness and convenience: The social organization of normality. Oxford, UK: Berg.
32.
Skr 2005/06:107. Think twice! An action plan for sustainable household consumption (Government Communication 2005/06:107). Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Consumer Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.sweden.gov.se/content/1/c6/06/57/11/3f3e2011.pdf
33.
SofoulisZ. (2005). Big water, everyday water: A sociotechnical perspective. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 19, 445-463.
34.
SofoulisZ.WilliamsC. (2008). From pushing atoms to growing networks: Cultural innovation and co-evolution in urban water conservation. Social Alternatives, 27(3), 50-57.
35.
SOU 2005:51. (2005). Bilen, Biffen, Bostaden: Hållbara laster, smartare konsumtion [The car, the beef, the dwelling: Sustainable loads, smarter consumption]. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes.
36.
SOU 2010:17. (2010). Prissatt vatten? [Priced water?]. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes.
37.
StorbjörkS.SöderbergH. (2003). Plötsligt händer det. Institutionella förutsättningar för uthålliga VA-system. Fallen Ringdansen, Surahammar och Hammarby Sjöstad [Suddenly it happens. Institutional prerequisites for sustainable water and sanitation systems. The cases Ringdansen, Surahammar and Hammarby Sjöstad] (Urban Water Report No. 2003:1). Göteborg, Sweden: Chalmers tekniska högskola, Forskningsprogrammet Urban Water.
38.
StrangV. (2004). The meaning of water. Oxford, UK: Berg.
39.
SummertonJ. (1992). District heating comes to town: The social shaping of an energy system. Linköping, Sweden: Linköping University Press.
40.
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. (2008). Miljömålen: Nu är det bråttom! Miljörådets utvärdering av Sveriges miljömål [The environmental objectives—hurry! The Environmental Objectives Council’s evaluation of Sweden’s environmental objectives]. Stockholm, Sweden: Naturvårdsverket.
41.
The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation. (2010). Naturskyddsföreningens synpunkter på Naturvårdsverkets redovisning av regeringsuppdrag om återföring av fosfor [The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation’s view on the Swedish Environmental Protections Agency’s report on the governmental assignment on phosphorous recycling]. Retrieved from http://www.naturskyddsforeningen.se/upload/Foreningsdokument/Remissvar/jordbruk/100816-aterforing-av-fosfor.pdf
The Swedish Water and Wastewater Association. (2011). REVAQ: Syfte, organisation och avgifter [REVAQ: Aim, organization, and fees]. Stockholm: Author.
46.
Van VlietB. (2002). Greening the grid: The ecological modernisation of network-bound systems. Wageningen, Netherlands: Wageningen University Press.
47.
Van VlietB.ChappellsH.ShoveE. (2005). Infrastructures of consumption: Environmental innovation in the utility industries. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Earthscan.
