Have we achieved the savings? The importance of evaluations when implementing demand management A. Turner, S. White, A. Kazaglis and S. Simard The Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia (E-mail: andrea.turner@uts.edu.au) Abstract Even though millions of dollars have been spent on demand management (DM) over the last decade across Australia, there is still very little evaluation of implemented DM/water efficiency programs. This paper brings together some of the limited examples of evaluation studies undertaken, providing details of both the statistical analysis method used and the findings of such studies undertaken by the Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) on behalf of water utilities. The studies include measurement of water savings in the residential and non-residential sectors and economic assessment of implemented programs. The paper highlights the importance of evaluation and need for embedding evaluation into the water planning process. It also highlights additional research currently being undertaken in this field associated with pressure reduction and energy usage when implementing DM programs. This paper will be of interest to a broad spectrum of practitioners beginning or currently involved in the development of DM programs or implementing and evaluating existing DM programs. Keywords Australia; demand management; evaluation of implementation; water efficiency Introduction The main purpose of DM programs is to reduce potable water demand to either achieve policy driven water efficiency targets or assist in filling the gap between supply and demand. With such options often being significantly lower cost to society than major supply alternatives they are increasingly being implemented by water utilities and agencies internationally. Unfortunately, after over a decade of implementing such programs in Australia, and millions of dollars of investment, there is still little assessment of their effectiveness. This is also true internationally. The effectiveness of DM programs can be measured by: † assessing whether the required participation rates are achieved; † customer satisfaction is obtained and maintained; † the assumed costs of the programs were accurate; and † the estimated water savings were achieved and maintained over time. The participation rates, costs and savings are important to determine the unit cost ($/kL) of the implemented program based on the total cost to society over time. Unit cost together with other criteria are used to assist in ranking options and deciding on whether to take particular options forward for implementation as outlined in the internationally recognised best practice decision making process, integrated resource planning, IRP, (Turner et al., 2006). Evaluation therefore forms an essential feed back loop to water effi- ciency teams implementing programs which will enable them to assess the effectiveness of programs both individually and overall, to improve/modify programs where they are not achieving required outcomes and where necessary cease implementation (Turner and White, 2006). This paper draws together some of the evaluation work undertaken in Australia over the last decade. A key focus of the paper will be to outline the best practice method of Water Science & Technology: Water Supply Vol 7 No 5-6 pp 203–210 Q IWA Publishing 2007 203 doi: 10.2166/ws.2007.111