IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i21p14145-d957496.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community Concern about the Health Effects of Pollutants: Risk Perception in an Italian Geothermal Area

Author

Listed:
  • Elisa Bustaffa

    (Unit of Environmental Epidemiology and Disease Registries, Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, Via Moruzzi 1, 56123 Pisa, Italy)

  • Olivia Curzio

    (Unit of Environmental Epidemiology and Disease Registries, Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, Via Moruzzi 1, 56123 Pisa, Italy)

  • Fabrizio Bianchi

    (Unit of Environmental Epidemiology and Disease Registries, Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, Via Moruzzi 1, 56123 Pisa, Italy)

  • Fabrizio Minichilli

    (Unit of Environmental Epidemiology and Disease Registries, Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, Via Moruzzi 1, 56123 Pisa, Italy)

  • Daniela Nuvolone

    (Unit of Epidemiology, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, Via Pietro Dazzi 1, 50141 Florence, Italy)

  • Davide Petri

    (Unit of Epidemiology, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, Via Pietro Dazzi 1, 50141 Florence, Italy
    Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Via Roma 67, 56126 Pisa, Italy)

  • Giorgia Stoppa

    (Unit of Epidemiology, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, Via Pietro Dazzi 1, 50141 Florence, Italy
    Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic, Vascular Sciences and Public Health, University of Padova, Via Loredan 18, 35131 Padova, Italy)

  • Fabio Voller

    (Unit of Epidemiology, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, Via Pietro Dazzi 1, 50141 Florence, Italy)

  • Liliana Cori

    (Unit of Environmental Epidemiology and Disease Registries, Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, Via Moruzzi 1, 56123 Pisa, Italy)

Abstract

Geothermal fluids for electricity and heat production have long been exploited in the Mt. Amiata area (Tuscany, Italy). Public concern about the health impact of geothermal plants has been present from the outset. Several factors influence the way people perceive risk; therefore, the objective of the present research is to develop indicators of risk perception and assess indices differences in relation to some questionnaire variables. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in the Amiata area on 2029 subjects aged 18–77. From the questionnaire section about risk perception from environmental hazards, four indicators were developed and analysed. A total of 64% of the subjects considered the environmental situation to be acceptable or excellent, 32% serious but reversible, and 4% serious and irreversible; as the values of the various perception indicators increased, an upward trend was observed in the averages. Risk perception was higher among women and young people, and was associated with higher education. Those who smelled bad odours in their surroundings reported higher risk perception. Furthermore, risk perception was higher in four municipalities. The results represent the basis for further investigations to analyse the link among risk perception indicators, exposure parameters, and health status.

Suggested Citation

  • Elisa Bustaffa & Olivia Curzio & Fabrizio Bianchi & Fabrizio Minichilli & Daniela Nuvolone & Davide Petri & Giorgia Stoppa & Fabio Voller & Liliana Cori, 2022. "Community Concern about the Health Effects of Pollutants: Risk Perception in an Italian Geothermal Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-17, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14145-:d:957496
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14145/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14145/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pellizzone, Anna & Allansdottir, Agnes & De Franco, Roberto & Muttoni, Giovanni & Manzella, Adele, 2017. "Geothermal energy and the public: A case study on deliberative citizens’ engagement in central Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 561-570.
    2. Simone Carr-Cornish & Lygia Romanach, 2014. "Differences in Public Perceptions of Geothermal Energy Technology in Australia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, March.
    3. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2020. "Some foundational issues related to risk governance and different types of risks," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(9), pages 1121-1134, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.
    2. Renato Somma & Daniela Blessent & Jasmin Raymond & Madeline Constance & Lucy Cotton & Giuseppe De Natale & Alessandro Fedele & Maria Jose Jurado & Kirsten Marcia & Mafalda Miranda & Claudia Troise & T, 2021. "Review of Recent Drilling Projects in Unconventional Geothermal Resources at Campi Flegrei Caldera, Cornubian Batholith, and Williston Sedimentary Basin," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-23, June.
    3. Baek, Haein & Chung, Ji-Bum & Yun, Gi Woong, 2021. "Differences in public perceptions of geothermal energy based on EGS technology in Korea after the Pohang earthquake: National vs. local," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    4. Romanach, Lygia & Carr-Cornish, Simone & Muriuki, Grace, 2015. "Societal acceptance of an emerging energy technology: How is geothermal energy portrayed in Australian media?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1143-1150.
    5. Barbara Pavlakovič & Milica Rančić Demir & Nejc Pozvek & Maja Turnšek, 2021. "Role of Tourism in Promoting Geothermal Energy: Public Interest and Motivation for Geothermal Energy Tourism in Slovenia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.
    6. Spampatti, Tobia & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Brosch, Tobias, 2022. "Short and long-term dominance of negative information in shaping public energy perceptions: The case of shallow geothermal systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Shakibi, Hamid & Faal, Mehrdad Yousefi & Assareh, Ehsanolah & Agarwal, Neha & Yari, Mortaza & Latifi, Seyed Ali & Ghodrat, Maryam & Lee, Moonyong, 2023. "Design and multi-objective optimization of a multi-generation system based on PEM electrolyzer, RO unit, absorption cooling system, and ORC utilizing machine learning approaches; a case study of Austr," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    8. Soltani, M. & Moradi Kashkooli, Farshad & Souri, Mohammad & Rafiei, Behnam & Jabarifar, Mohammad & Gharali, Kobra & Nathwani, Jatin S., 2021. "Environmental, economic, and social impacts of geothermal energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    9. Bleicher, Alena & David, Martin & Rutjes, Henriette & Wallkamm, Magdalena, 2017. "Rohstoffgewinnung und Technologieentwicklung in Deutschland im Wandel: Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven," UFZ Reports 05/2017, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ).
    10. Cordoves-Sánchez, Minerva & Vallejos-Romero, Arturo, 2019. "Social construction of risk in non-conventional renewable energy: Risk perception as a function of ecosystem services in La Araucanía, Chile," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 261-270.
    11. Hou, Jianchao & Cao, Mengchao & Liu, Pingkuo, 2018. "Development and utilization of geothermal energy in China: Current practices and future strategies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 401-412.
    12. Sun, Qingxuan & Wang, Yaxiong & Cheng, Ziyang & Wang, Jiangfeng & Zhao, Pan & Dai, Yiping, 2020. "Thermodynamic and economic optimization of a double-pressure organic Rankine cycle driven by low-temperature heat source," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(P3), pages 2822-2832.
    13. Paul L. Younger, 2015. "Geothermal Energy: Delivering on the Global Potential," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-18, October.
    14. Anastasia Ioannou & Gioia Falcone & Christina Baisch & Georgie Friederichs & Jan Hildebrand, 2023. "A Decision Support Tool for Social Engagement, Alternative Financing and Risk Mitigation of Geothermal Energy Projects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-25, January.
    15. Joel Rasmussen & Petter B. Wikström, 2022. "Returning Home after Decontamination? Applying the Protective Action Decision Model to a Nuclear Accident Scenario," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-16, June.
    16. Ibrahim Mosly & Anas A. Makki, 2018. "Current Status and Willingness to Adopt Renewable Energy Technologies in Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    17. Jin-Li Hu & Po-Sheng Yang, 2024. "Interactive Cycles between Energy Education and Energy Preferences: A Literature Review on Empirical Evidence," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-31, October.
    18. Bănică, Bianca & Patrício, Lia & Miguéis, Vera, 2024. "Citizen engagement with sustainable energy solutions - understanding the influence of perceived value on engagement behaviors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    19. Ursula Oswald Spring, 2022. "Climate-induced migrations in Mesoamerica with a gender perspective," Remef - Revista Mexicana de Economía y Finanzas Nueva Época REMEF (The Mexican Journal of Economics and Finance), Instituto Mexicano de Ejecutivos de Finanzas, IMEF, vol. 17(4), pages 1-27, Octubre -.
    20. Evgeniya Lupova-Henry & Nicola Francesco Dotti, 2019. "Governance of sustainable innovation: Moving beyond the hierarchy-market-network trichotomy? A systematic literature review using the ‘who-how-what’ framework," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/283521, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

    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:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14145-:d:957496. 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.