IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v11y2014i6p6291-6313d37142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Determinants of Environmental Risk Perception for Risk Management in Contaminated Sites

Author

Listed:
  • Piyapong Janmaimool

    (Graduate School of Engineering, Kochi University of Technology, Tosayamada-cho, Kami City, Kōchi 782-8502, Japan)

  • Tsunemi Watanabe

    (Graduate School of Engineering, Kochi University of Technology, Tosayamada-cho, Kami City, Kōchi 782-8502, Japan
    School of Management, Kochi University of Technology, Tosayamada-cho, Kami City, Kōchi 782-8502, Japan)

Abstract

Understanding the differences in the risk judgments of residents of industrial communities potentially provides insights into how to develop appropriate risk communication strategies. This study aimed to explore citizens’ fundamental understanding of risk-related judgments and to identify the factors contributing to perceived risks. An exploratory model was created to investigate the public’s risk judgments. In this model, the relationship between laypeople’s perceived risks and the factors related to the physical nature of risks (such as perceived probability of environmental contamination, probability of receiving impacts, and severity of catastrophic consequences) were examined by means of multiple regression analysis. Psychological factors, such as the ability to control the risks, concerns, experiences, and perceived benefits of industrial development were also included in the analysis. The Maptaphut industrial area in Rayong Province, Thailand was selected as a case study. A survey of 181 residents of communities experiencing different levels of hazardous gas contamination revealed rational risk judgments by inhabitants of high-risk and moderate-risk communities, based on their perceived probability of contamination, probability of receiving impacts, and perceived catastrophic consequences. However, risks assessed by people in low-risk communities could not be rationally explained and were influenced by their collective experiences.

Suggested Citation

  • Piyapong Janmaimool & Tsunemi Watanabe, 2014. "Evaluating Determinants of Environmental Risk Perception for Risk Management in Contaminated Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-23, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:11:y:2014:i:6:p:6291-6313:d:37142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/11/6/6291/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/11/6/6291/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gisela Wachinger & Ortwin Renn & Chloe Begg & Christian Kuhlicke, 2013. "The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1049-1065, June.
    2. Miguel Ángel López-Navarro & Jaume Llorens-Monzonís & Vicente Tortosa-Edo, 2013. "The Effect of Social Trust on Citizens’ Health Risk Perception in the Context of a Petrochemical Industrial Complex," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Lennart Sjöberg, 2000. "Factors in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    4. Lorraine Whitmarsh, 2008. "Are flood victims more concerned about climate change than other people? The role of direct experience in risk perception and behavioural response," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 351-374, April.
    5. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    6. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2010. "Risk Management and Governance," Risk, Governance and Society, Springer, number 978-3-642-13926-0, September.
    7. Donna M. Dosman & Wiktor L. Adamowicz & Steve E. Hrudey, 2001. "Socioeconomic Determinants of Health‐ and Food Safety‐Related Risk Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 307-318, April.
    8. Luginaah, Isaac N. & Martin Taylor, S. & Elliott, Susan J. & Eyles, John D., 2002. "Community reappraisal of the perceived health effects of a petroleum refinery," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 47-61, July.
    9. Michael W. Slimak & Thomas Dietz, 2006. "Personal Values, Beliefs, and Ecological Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1689-1705, December.
    10. Kate Burningham & Diana Thrush, 2004. "Pollution concerns in context: a comparison of local perceptions of the risks associated with living close to a road and a chemical factory," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 213-232, March.
    11. Robin Gregory & Robert Mendelsohn, 1993. "Perceived Risk, Dread, and Benefits," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 259-264, June.
    12. Harry Otway & Kerry Thomas, 1982. "Reflections on Risk Perception and Policy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 69-82, June.
    13. Veland, H. & Aven, T., 2013. "Risk communication in the light of different risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 34-40.
    14. Ali Siddiq Alhakami & Paul Slovic, 1994. "A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 1085-1096, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Costa-Font, Joan & Vilaplana-Prieto, Cristina, 2023. "Health System Trust and Compliance with COVID-19 Restrictions," IZA Discussion Papers 15961, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Kuo-Wei Hsu & Jen-Chih Chao & Ching-Yi Hsu, 2021. "Environmental Risk Perception and Preventive Behavior during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Central Taiwan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-10, September.
    3. Raja M. Nagisetty & William B. Macgregor & David Hutchins & Daniel A. Autenrieth & Alyssa M. Plant, 2022. "Effects of Residential Environmental Screening and Perception Surveys on Superfund Environmental Health Risk Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-29, July.
    4. Yong Chen & Yaqi Liang & Hao Zhou & Qiaozhi Wang & Yanzhong Liu, 2022. "Farmers’ Adaptive Behaviors to Heavy Metal-Polluted Cultivated Land in Mining Areas: The Influence of Farmers’ Characteristics and the Mediating Role of Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-17, May.
    5. Costa-Font, Joan & Vilaplana-Prieto, Cristina, 2023. "Trusting the health system and COVID 19 restriction compliance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118267, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Sandra Cortés & Soledad Burgos & Héctor Adaros & Boris Lucero & Lesliam Quirós-Alcalá, 2021. "Environmental Health Risk Perception: Adaptation of a Population-Based Questionnaire from Latin America," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-13, August.
    7. Costa-Font, Joan & Vilaplana-Prieto, Cristina, 2023. "Trusting the Health System and COVID 19 Restriction Compliance," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    8. Mikyong Shin & Angela K. Werner & Heather Strosnider & Lisa B. Hines & Lina Balluz & Fuyuen Y. Yip, 2019. "Public Perceptions of Environmental Public Health Risks in the United States," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-13, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    2. P. Marijn Poortvliet & Anne Marike Lokhorst, 2016. "The Key Role of Experiential Uncertainty when Dealing with Risks: Its Relationships with Demand for Regulation and Institutional Trust," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1615-1629, August.
    3. Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2021. "The Landscape of Risk Perception Research: A Scientometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-26, November.
    4. Michel Setbon & Jocelyn Raude & Claude Fischler & Antoine Flahault, 2005. "Risk Perception of the “Mad Cow Disease” in France: Determinants and Consequences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 813-826, August.
    5. John D. Graham & John A. Rupp & Olga Schenk, 2015. "Unconventional Gas Development in the USA: Exploring the Risk Perception Issues," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1770-1788, October.
    6. Daniela Knuth & Doris Kehl & Lynn Hulse & Silke Schmidt, 2014. "Risk Perception, Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1286-1298, July.
    7. Joan Nymand Larsen & Peter Schweitzer & Khaled Abass & Natalia Doloisio & Susanna Gartler & Thomas Ingeman-Nielsen & Jón Haukur Ingimundarson & Leneisja Jungsberg & Alexandra Meyer & Arja Rautio & Joh, 2021. "Thawing Permafrost in Arctic Coastal Communities: A Framework for Studying Risks from Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.
    8. Judith I. M. de Groot & Linda Steg & Wouter Poortinga, 2013. "Values, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Acceptability of Nuclear Energy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 307-317, February.
    9. Elisabeth Maidl & David N. Bresch & Matthias Buchecker, 2021. "Social integration matters: factors influencing natural hazard risk preparedness—a survey of Swiss households," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 105(2), pages 1861-1890, January.
    10. Theresa A. K. Knoblauch & Michael Stauffacher & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2018. "Communicating Low‐Probability High‐Consequence Risk, Uncertainty and Expert Confidence: Induced Seismicity of Deep Geothermal Energy and Shale Gas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(4), pages 694-709, April.
    11. Francesca S. Cardwell & Susan J. Elliott, 2019. "Understanding an Environmental Health Risk: Investigating Asthma Risk Perception in Ontario Youth Sport," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, June.
    12. Frédéric Vandermoere, 2008. "Hazard Perception, Risk Perception, and the Need for Decontamination by Residents Exposed to Soil Pollution: The Role of Sustainability and the Limits of Expert Knowledge," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 387-398, April.
    13. Elizabeth A Albright & Deserai Crow, 2019. "Beliefs about climate change in the aftermath of extreme flooding," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 1-17, July.
    14. Yanbo Zhang & Yibao Wang & Ahmad Bayiz Ahmad & Ashfaq Ahmad Shah & Wen Qing, 2021. "How Do Individual-Level Characteristics Influence Cross-Domain Risk Perceptions Among Chinese Urban Residents?," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, April.
    15. Branden B. Johnson & Brendon Swedlow, 2021. "Cultural Theory's Contributions to Risk Analysis: A Thematic Review with Directions and Resources for Further Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 429-455, March.
    16. Linzenich, Anika & Arning, Katrin & Ziefle, Martina, 2021. "Acceptance of energy technologies in context: Comparing laypeople's risk perceptions across eight infrastructure technologies in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    17. Sisira S. Withanachchi & Ilia Kunchulia & Giorgi Ghambashidze & Rami Al Sidawi & Teo Urushadze & Angelika Ploeger, 2018. "Farmers’ Perception of Water Quality and Risks in the Mashavera River Basin, Georgia: Analyzing the Vulnerability of the Social-Ecological System through Community Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-26, August.
    18. Hung‐Chih Hung & Tzu‐Wen Wang, 2011. "Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 668-683, April.
    19. Ling Jia & Queena K. Qian & Frits Meijer & Henk Visscher, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perception: A Perspective for Proactive Risk Management in Residential Building Energy Retrofits in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    20. Agustin Robles Morua & Kathleen E. Halvorsen & Alex S. Mayer, 2011. "Waterborne Disease‐Related Risk Perceptions in the Sonora River Basin, Mexico," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 866-878, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:11:y:2014:i:6:p:6291-6313:d:37142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.