Environmental Hazards in the Chinese Public's Eyes

The People's Republic of China suffers each year from various environmental hazards. Although risk perception study has a 40-year history in Europe and North America, little is known about risk perception in China. Previous studies of risk perception have primarily focused on unnatural hazards, but China has experinced many natural environmental hazards. Therefore, the Chinese public's perceptions of environmental hazard risks must be considered in order to support the IDNDR program. The Chinese public's perceptions of environmental hazards are similar to those of Europeans and North Americans, but different characteristics are observed.     

Perception of Environmental Hazards in Hong Kong Chinese

A public sample of Hong Kong Chinese (N = 167) rated the levels of threat of 25 environmental hazards and gave quantitative judgments to six risk characteristics for each hazard. It was found that women, older participants, and less educated individuals found the hazards to be more threatening to the environment than did men, younger participants, and more educated individuals, respectively. A new spatial model emerged from a principal component analysis carried out on responses to six risk characteristics. Instead of replicating the well-documented factors of unknown risk versus dread risk, we found a structure defined by a known and dread risk factor and a controllable risk factor. Findings were discussed in light of potential influences of the Confucian heritage on the perception of risks among Hong Kong Chinese.     

Perception of Hazards: The Role of Social Trust and Knowledge

Recent research indicates that social trust of those who manage a hazard is strongly correlated to judgments about the hazard's risk and benefits. The present study investigates the more specific question of “For which hazards is this?” It was postulated that when an individual lacks knowledge about a hazard, social trust of authorities managing the hazard determines perceived risks and benefits. On the other hand, when an individual has personal knowledge about a hazard and therefore does not need to rely on managing authorities, social trust is unrelated to judged risks and benefits. Participants (N = 91) assessed risks, benefits, and trust in managing authorities and personal knowledge associated with 25 hazardous technologies and activities. As expected, strong correlations between social trust and judged risks and benefits were observed for hazards about which people did not possess much knowledge. No significant correlations between social trust and judged risks and benefits were found for hazards about which people were knowledgeable. Results suggest that the lay public relies on social trust when making judgments of risks and benefits when personal knowledge about a hazard is lacking. Replicating findings of other studies, the present study also found negative correlations between perceived risks and perceived benefits. When social trust was controlled for, correlations between perceived risks and benefits diminished. Implications of the results for risk management are discussed.     

Methodological Approaches to Assessing Risk Perceptions Associated with Food-Related Hazards

The psychometric approach developed by Slovic and his co-workers has been effectively used to assess risk perceptions associated with different food-related hazards. However, further examination (using questionnaire data and partial correlation techniques) has indicated that technological hazards are highly differentiated from lifestyle hazards, in terms of both hazard control and knowledge about the hazard. Optimistic bias was also seen to vary between hazards. Further research has focused on a particular hazard, genetic engineering. Risk perceptions associated with genetic engineering are underpinned by ethical concern and questions relating to perceived need for the technology, as well as perceptions of risk or harm. However, increasing the specificity of hazard stimuli was found to alter the factor structure of underlying risk perceptions. The utility of preference mapping procedures in determining individual differences in trust in risk regulators is also discussed.     

Understanding the Relationship Between Direct Experience and Risk Perception of Natural Hazards

Risk perception has been largely examined in studies that have aimed to explain and predict preparedness behavior in the context of natural hazards. Findings from studies on the relationship between previous experience, preparedness, and risk perception in disaster situations have been inconsistent. Hence, the main goal of this work was to explore the influence of physical and emotional experience on risk perception regarding natural hazards. This study was conducted in a statistically representative sample of the city of Iquique, in northern Chile (n = 701), who completed a survey one month after the occurrence of an earthquake and tsunami (8.2 Mw). The survey assessed the experience and preparation actions of survivors in relation to this event. Using a structural equation model, we examined nine proposed relationships, six of which were significant. The final model had an adequate fit (χ² = 752.23, df = 283, comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.90, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.049). Direct experience showed the greatest influence on risk perception: while direct physical experience (i.e., the physical and material consequences associated with the earthquake) maintained a direct positive effect on risk perception, direct emotional experience (i.e., the fear of experiencing an earthquake) produced an indirect positive effect (through worry). Emotional experience, however, did not directly influence current preparedness and risk perception. Implications for understanding the relationship between risk perception and direct experience are discussed.     

Public Perceptions of the Potential Hazards Associated with Food Production and Food Consumption: An Empirical Study

Although public perceptions of food-related hazards receive much media comment and debate, the research literature on such perceptions is sparse and piecemeal. In the reported study, 216 people completed a questionnaire relating to their perceptions of the "risk characteristics" of potential hazards associated with various aspects of food production and food consumption. Responses were examined via principal-components analysis to obtain a structural representation of risk perception of the kind provided by Fischhoff, Slovic, and their colleagues in their seminal psychometric work.^(1,2) A three-component solution accounting for 87% of the variance was obtained, with the dimensions labeled as "severity,""unknown," and "number of people exposed." The findings also yielded information pointing to evidence of the phenomenon of unrealistic optimism. We conclude that our findings offer a useful base upon which further in-depth research integrating different perspectives on risk perception with respect to food-related hazards may be developed.     

Risk Perception, Federal Spending, and the Savannah River Site: Attitudes of Hunters and Fishermen

This paper examines the attitudes of 285 hunters and fishermen from South Carolina about hunting and fishing, risk, environmental issues, and future land use of the Savannah River Site. We test the null hypothesis that there is no difference in hunting and fishing rates, attitudes toward the safety of fish and deer obtained from SRS, attitudes toward future land use at SRS, and perceptions of the severity of environmental problems as a function of how far respondents lived from the site. Respondents hunted or fished an average of over 40 days a year, and only half felt that the fish and deer from SRS were safe to eat. Willingness to expend federal funds was correlated with perceptions of the severity of the problem. Preferences for future land use at SRS fell into three categories: high (environmental research park, hunting, fishing, camping), medium (nuclear production, factories, preserve only), and low (nuclear waste storage, residential). There were no differences in hunting and fishing rates, ranking of the severity of environmental problems, and willingness to expend federal funds as a function of distance of residence from SRS, but attitudes toward future land use differed significantly as a function of location of residence. Those living close to SRS were more willing to have the site used for factories, residential, nuclear material production and to store nuclear wastes than those living farther from the site. Our data on recreational rates, attitudes toward future land use, and willingness to expend federal funds to solve environmental problems reiterate the importance of assessing stakeholder attitudes toward decisions regarding future land use at DOE sites     

Fishing a Superfund Site: Dissonance and Risk Perception of Environmental Hazards by Fishermen in Puerto Rico

Risk perception studies show that individuals tend to underestimate significant risks, overestimate negligible ones, and distrust authorities. They also rely on a variety of strategies or heuristics to reach decisions regarding their risk-taking behavior. We report on a survey of fishermen and crabbers engaged in recreational and substance fishing in a Puerto Rican estuary (near Humacao), which has been declared a "Superfund site" because of suspected contamination by mercury, and at ecologically similar control sites. Nearly everyone interviewed at the Humacao site was aware of the mercury contamination, but either denied its importance, believed the contamination was restricted to a distant part of the estuary, or assumed that the estuary would be closed by the authorities if the threat was real. All site-users consumed the fish and crabs they caught. At Humacao, the average catch was 7 fish per fishermen (mostly tilapia, Tilapia mossambica, and tarpon, Megalops atlantica) and 13 crabs per crabber (all blue crabs, Callinectes sapidus). On average, the site-users returned to the lagoons about 3-4 times per month. At control sites, fewer fish were eaten. The worst case consumption of tarpon, a species which concentrated mercury at Eastern Puerto Rico, provided an exposure exceeding the EPA reference dose, whereas consumption of one tarpon per week did not entail excess exposure. Fortunately, few individuals caught tarpon exclusively. Unlike counterparts in the northeastern United States, they trusted authorities and indicated that they would have heeded warnings of mercury contamination posted where they fished.     

The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards

This article reviews the main insights from selected literature on risk perception, particularly in connection with natural hazards. It includes numerous case studies on perception and social behavior dealing with floods, droughts, earthquakes, volcano eruptions, wild fires, and landslides. The review reveals that personal experience of a natural hazard and trust—or lack of trust—in authorities and experts have the most substantial impact on risk perception. Cultural and individual factors such as media coverage, age, gender, education, income, social status, and others do not play such an important role but act as mediators or amplifiers of the main causal connections between experience, trust, perception, and preparedness to take protective actions. When analyzing the factors of experience and trust on risk perception and on the likeliness of individuals to take preparedness action, the review found that a risk perception paradox exists in that it is assumed that high risk perception will lead to personal preparedness and, in the next step, to risk mitigation behavior. However, this is not necessarily true. In fact, the opposite can occur if individuals with high risk perception still choose not to personally prepare themselves in the face of a natural hazard. Therefore, based on the results of the review, this article offers three explanations suggesting why this paradox might occur. These findings have implications for future risk governance and communication as well as for the willingness of individuals to invest in risk preparedness or risk mitigation actions.     

Perception and Acceptance of Technological and Environmental Risks: Why Are Poor Countries Less Concerned?

The research has been aimed at answering two questions: (1) What factors impact perception and acceptance of technological and environmental hazards? (2) Why are rich societies involved more in protecting their environment and health than poor societies? Data has been collected from representative samples of two countries—Poland and Sweden. The results indicate that (1) contrary to earlier findings, the inverse relations between perceived benefits and dangers of hazards has not been observed, (2) acceptance of a risk has been mostly influenced by perceived benefits, (3) rejection of a risk has been mostly influenced by its perceived harmful consequences. Concerning the second question, it has been found that: (1) perceived hazard's danger and benefit is not the only factor that impacts its acceptance, and (2) a broader economic context can impact acceptance (tolerance) of hazards. It has been found that being aware of high dangers and not very high benefits of hazardous activities, Poles still have accepted them. Thus, Poles seem to follow an old proverb: “When one does not have what one likes, one has to like what one has.”     

Elicitation of Decision-Makers'Preferences for Management of Major Hazards

A survey has been conducted among decision-makers from the urban area of Lyon (France). It aimed at elicitating attitudes toward industrial risk, with an emphasis on major hazards. The sample was quite small (23 individuals), but most of the actual decision-makers of the area belonged to it. A questionnaire allowed to look at the weights that are given to "catastrophic accidents," when compared to more usual ones. It showed that decision-makers are strongly "adverse to catastrophes." The findings support many risk management approaches that are based on assigning an "extra weight" to potential accidents that may cause a high number of casualties.     

Public Perceptions of Everyday Food Hazards: A Psychometric Study

In this paper, we discuss the conduct and results of a study aimed at eliciting public perceptions of food-related hazards. This study employs the psychometric approach of Paul Slovic and colleagues and aims to extend the recent work of Sparks and Shepherd⁽¹⁾ on defining the primary dimensions of food-related risk perceptions. The study surveyed a nationally representative sample of the general public (respondents = 293; adjusted response rate = 30.1%). Respondents provided ratings on subsets of 22 potential food hazards (e.g., food irradiation and presence of listeria) on a total of 19 risk characteristics (e.g., "perceived severity of risk" and "adequacy of governmental regulations"). In spite of the use of a number of new characteristics and food hazards, Principal Components Analysis revealed a broadly similar factor structure to that obtained by Sparks and Shepherd,⁽¹⁾ suggesting the generalizability of the key dimensions (concerning the severity and awareness of hazards). Interestingly, the positioning in the factor space of potential hazards about which little was generally known (e.g., campylobacter) as being serious and in need of regulation, may suggest a possible "starting position" in the perception of new hazards that have not previously been the subject of risk communications.     

Neighborhood Quality, Environmental Hazards, Personality Traits, and Resident Actions

A survey of 798 New Jersey residents examined relationships among residents' neighborhood activities, perceptions of neighborhood quality, trust of experts, support for rebuilding cities and equal rights, and degree of optimism. Neighborhood activities increased with lack of trust and optimism. These personality characteristic measures were folded into multidimensional constructs that included local environmental hazards, respondents' ratings of their previous neighborhoods, and some demographic variables. Pessimism and values that support equal rights and rebuilding cities were weakly associated with poor quality neighborhood ratings.     

Estimating Health Risks from Natural Hazards Using Risk Assessment and Epidemiology

Risk assessment is the process of estimating the likelihood that an adverse effect may result from exposure to a specific health hazard. The process traditionally involves hazard identification, dose-response assessment, exposure assessment, and risk characterization to answer “How many excess cases of disease A will occur in a population of size B due to exposure to agent C at dose level D?” For natural hazards, however, we modify the risk assessment paradigm to answer “How many excess cases of outcome Y will occur in a population of size B due to natural hazard event E of severity D?” Using a modified version involving hazard identification, risk factor characterization, exposure characterization, and risk characterization, we demonstrate that epidemiologic modeling and measures of risk can quantify the risks from natural hazard events. We further extend the paradigm to address mitigation, the equivalent of risk management, to answer “What is the risk for outcome Y in the presence of prevention intervention X relative to the risk for Y in the absence of X?” We use the preventable fraction to estimate the efficacy of mitigation, or reduction in adverse health outcomes as a result of a prevention strategy under ideal circumstances, and further estimate the effectiveness of mitigation, or reduction in adverse health outcomes under typical community-based settings. By relating socioeconomic costs of mitigation to measures of risk, we illustrate that prevention effectiveness is useful for developing cost-effective risk management options.     

Information Hazards in Biotechnology

With the advance of biotechnology, biological information, rather than biological materials, is increasingly the object of principal security concern. We argue that both in theory and in practice, existing security approaches in biology are poorly suited to manage hazardous biological information, and use the cases of Mousepox, H5N1 gain of function, and Botulinum toxin H to highlight these ongoing challenges. We suggest that mitigation of these hazards can be improved if one can: (1) anticipate hazard potential before scientific work is performed; (2) consider how much the new information would likely help both good and bad actors; and (3) aim to disclose information in the manner that maximally disadvantages bad actors versus good ones.     

Human and Nature‐Caused Hazards: The Affect Heuristic Causes Biased Decisions

People are more concerned about the negative consequences of human hazards compared with natural hazards. Results of four experiments show that the same negative outcome (e.g., number of birds killed by an oil spill) was more negatively evaluated when caused by humans than when caused by nature. Results further show that when identical risk information was provided, participants evaluated nuclear power more negatively compared with solar power. The affect associated with the hazard per se influenced the interpretation of the new information. Furthermore, the affect experienced in the situation fully mediated the evaluation of the negative outcomes of a hazard. People's reliance on the affect heuristic is a challenge for acceptance of cost‐benefit analyses because equally negative outcomes are differently evaluated depending on the cause. Symbolically significant information and the affect evoked by this information may result in biased and riskier decisions.     

Ranking the Risks from Multiple Hazards in a Small Community

Natural hazards, human-induced accidents, and malicious acts have caused great losses and disruptions to society. After September 11, 2001, critical infrastructure protection has become a national focus in the United States and is likely to remain one for the foreseeable future. Damage to the infrastructures and assets could be mitigated through predisaster planning and actions. A systematic methodology was developed to assess and rank the risks from these multiple hazards in a community of 20,000 people. It is an interdisciplinary study that includes probabilistic risk assessment (PRA), decision analysis, and expert judgment. Scenarios are constructed to show how the initiating events evolve into undesirable consequences. A value tree, based on multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT), is used to capture the decisionmaker's preferences about the impacts on the infrastructures and other assets. The risks from random failures are ranked according to their expected performance index (PI), which is the product of frequency, probabilities, and consequences of a scenario. Risks from malicious acts are ranked according to their PI as the frequency of attack is not available. A deliberative process is used to capture the factors that could not be addressed in the analysis and to scrutinize the results. This methodology provides a framework for the development of a risk-informed decision strategy. Although this study uses the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus as a case study of a real project, it is a general methodology that could be used by other similar communities and municipalities.     

Risk Communication in Environmental Restoration Programs

The author advocates adoption of a convergence model in place of the traditional source-receiver model of communication for communicating with members of the public who have a stake in remediation of a nearby site. The source-receiver model conceives of communication as the transmission of a message from a risk management agency (sender) to a target audience of the public (receivers). The underlying theme is that the sender intends to change the perception of the receiver of either the issue or the sender of information. The author draws on her experience at a Department of Energy (DoE) site undergoing remediation to illustrate why the convergence model is more appropriate in the context of cleanup. This alternative model focuses on the Latin derivation of communication as sharing or making common to many (i.e., as involving a relationship between participants who engage in a process of communication). The focus appears to be consistent with recently issued DoE policy that calls for involving the public in identifying issues and problems and in formulating and evaluating decision alternatives in cleanup. By emphasizing context, process, and participants, as opposed to senders and receivers, the model identifies key issues to address in facilitating consensus concerning the risks of cleanup. Similarities between the institutional context of DoE and Department of Defense (DoD) suggest that a convergence model may also prove to be an appropriate conceptual foundation for risk communication at contaminated DoD sites.     

The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study

This study examines a key component of environmental risk communication; trust and credibility. The study was conducted in two parts. In the first part, six hypotheses regarding the perceptions and determinants of trust and credibility were tested against survey data. The hypotheses were supported by the data. The most important hypothesis was that perceptions of trust and credibility are dependent on three factors: perceptions of knowledge and expertise; perceptions of openness and honesty; and perceptions of concern and care. In the second part, models were constructed with perceptions of trust and credibility as the dependent variable. The goal was to examine the data for findings with direct policy implications. One such finding was that defying a negative stereotype is key to improving perceptions of trust and credibility.     

Acute Exposure to Extremely Hazardous Substances: An Analysis of Environmental Equity

Although environmental equity research has focused primarily on chronic pollution sources, recent advances in environmental modeling and geographic information systems (GIS) provide a foundation for developing measures that can be used to evaluate differential exposure to acute pollution events. This article describes a methodology that uses facility-specific information to develop a risk surface representing the spatial distribution of accidental exposure to hazardous substances in a study area. Environmental pollution models recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency were used in conjunction with GIS software to achieve this objective. The methodology was implemented in a large metropolitan region (Hillsborough County, Florida) to examine disproportionate exposure to worst-case releases of extremely hazardous substances. The environmental inequity hypothesis was investigated by directly comparing the distribution of potential exposures within each racial (non-White versus White) and income (below poverty versus above poverty) subgroup. The results indicate that a significantly large proportion of both non-White and impoverished individuals resided in areas potentially exposed to multiple accidental releases.