IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2723-d339007.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Evaluation of “Not-In-My-Back-Yard” Conflict Potential in Facilities Group: A Case Study of Chemical Park in Xuwei New District, China

Author

Listed:
  • Yongyou Nie

    (School of Economics, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

  • Jinbu Zhao

    (School of Economics, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

  • Yiyi Zhang

    (School of Economics, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

  • Jizhi Zhou

    (School of Economics, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

Abstract

The social risk of chemical industry park projects attracts much attention, as they are perceived to yield strong environmental risks. This paper systematically evaluates the social risk of Xuwei Chemical Park in China, which was investigated as an example to guide the risk control strategy of conflict in industrial facilities for developing countries. The results show that residents and government departments have a resistance to the risks of the project as a stronger sense of group risk perception (the value is 7 × 10 −6 ) compared with the basic value of 7 × 10 −5 . By contrast, the low value of group risk perception was evaluated in an enterprise group (7 × 10 −4 ), indicating that the risks of petrochemical projects are often accepted. The expert group’s risk perception regarding petrochemical projects is consistent with the basic value. This is a very interesting finding indicating that the greater the experience, the more the support for petrochemical projects. The knowledge and information from education or experience improve the judgment of the risk of the facility, which increases the individual’s rational assessment comprehension of risk. Moreover, factors that are significantly related to residents’ attitudes are information cognitive factors (trust in information publicity and petrochemical project understanding), and project influencing factors (project planning rationality, quality of life improvement, and economic development satisfaction). Among them, the degree of trust in information disclosure has the highest degree of influence, followed by the level of education, while the satisfaction with economic development has the lowest degree of influence. Therefore, improving the trust of residents in the information disclosure of petrochemical projects should be the core of the government’s risk control policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongyou Nie & Jinbu Zhao & Yiyi Zhang & Jizhi Zhou, 2020. "Risk Evaluation of “Not-In-My-Back-Yard” Conflict Potential in Facilities Group: A Case Study of Chemical Park in Xuwei New District, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2723-:d:339007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2723/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2723/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rutsaert, Pieter & Pieniak, Zuzanna & Regan, Áine & McConnon, Áine & Kuttschreuter, Margôt & Lores, Mònica & Lozano, Natàlia & Guzzon, Antonella & Santare, Dace & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "Social media as a useful tool in food risk and benefit communication? A strategic orientation approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 84-93.
    2. Christopher D. Wirz & Michael A. Xenos & Dominique Brossard & Dietram Scheufele & Jennifer H. Chung & Luisa Massarani, 2018. "Rethinking Social Amplification of Risk: Social Media and Zika in Three Languages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2599-2624, December.
    3. Guido Signorino, 2012. "Proximity and risk perception. Comparing risk perception 'profiles' in two petrochemical areas of Sicily (Augusta and Milazzo)," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(10), pages 1223-1243, November.
    4. Lynn J. Frewer & Susan Miles & Roy Marsh, 2002. "The Media and Genetically Modified Foods: Evidence in Support of Social Amplification of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 701-711, August.
    5. Geng, Zhiqiang & Zeng, Rongfu & Han, Yongming & Zhong, Yanhua & Fu, Hua, 2019. "Energy efficiency evaluation and energy saving based on DEA integrated affinity propagation clustering: Case study of complex petrochemical industries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 863-875.
    6. Tiankui Li & Yi Liu & Sijie Lin & Yangze Liu & Yunfeng Xie, 2019. "Soil Pollution Management in China: A Brief Introduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    7. Paul T E Cusack, 2020. "On Pain," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 31(3), pages 24253-24254, October.
    8. V. Tortosa-Edo & M.A. López-Navarro & J. Llorens-Monzonís & R.M. Rodríguez-Artola, 2014. "The antecedent role of personal environmental values in the relationships among trust in companies, information processing and risk perception," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(8), pages 1019-1035, September.
    9. A. J. Ignatowski & I. Rosenthal, 2001. "The Chemical Accident Risk Assessment Thesaurus: A Tool for Analyzing and Comparing Diverse Risk Assessment Processes and Definitions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(3), pages 513-532, June.
    10. Yongrok Choi & Hyoung Seok Lee & Ahmed Mastur, 2019. "Are Sustainable Development Policies Really Feasible? Focused on the Petrochemical Industry in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-17, July.
    11. Zain Ul-Abdin & Pieter De Winne & Hans De Backer, 2019. "Risk-Perception Formation Considering Tangible and Non-Tangible Aspects of Cycling: A Flemish Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-19, November.
    12. Antunes, António & Bonfim, Diana & Monteiro, Nuno & Rodrigues, Paulo M.M., 2018. "Forecasting banking crises with dynamic panel probit models," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 249-275.
    13. Robert D. Jagiello & Thomas T. Hills, 2018. "Bad News Has Wings: Dread Risk Mediates Social Amplification in Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(10), pages 2193-2207, October.
    14. John Fellenor & Julie Barnett & Clive Potter & Julie Urquhart & J.D. Mumford & C.P. Quine, 2018. "The social amplification of risk on Twitter: the case of ash dieback disease in the United Kingdom," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(10), pages 1163-1183, October.
    15. Huiru Zhao & Nana Li, 2015. "Risk Evaluation of a UHV Power Transmission Construction Project Based on a Cloud Model and FCE Method for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-30, March.
    16. Jie Ma & Xin Ye & Cheng Shi, 2018. "Development of Multivariate Ordered Probit Model to Understand Household Vehicle Ownership Behavior in Xiaoshan District of Hangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Alileche, Nassim & Cozzani, Valerio & Reniers, Genserik & Estel, Lionel, 2015. "Thresholds for domino effects and safety distances in the process industry: A review of approaches and regulations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 74-84.
    18. Yu, Chin-Hsien & Huang, Shih-Kai & Qin, Ping & Chen, Xiaolan, 2018. "Local residents' risk perceptions in response to shale gas exploitation: Evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 123-134.
    19. Zhu, Weiwei & Wei, Jiuchang & Zhao, Dingtao, 2016. "Anti-nuclear behavioral intentions: The role of perceived knowledge, information processing, and risk perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 168-177.
    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. Lee, Edmund W.J. & Bao, Huanyu & Wang, Yixi & Lim, Yi Torng, 2023. "From pandemic to Plandemic: Examining the amplification and attenuation of COVID-19 misinformation on social media," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 328(C).
    2. Peer Henri Kieweg & Stefanie Schöberl & Gabriele Palozzi, 2021. "The Role of Communication In COVID-19 Crisis Management: Findings about Information Behavior of German and Italian Young People," International Journal of Business Research and Management (IJBRM), Computer Science Journals (CSC Journals), vol. 12(5), pages 263-288, October.
    3. Dominic Balog‐Way & Katherine McComas & John Besley, 2020. "The Evolving Field of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2240-2262, November.
    4. Daniel Niederer & Juliane Mueller, 2020. "Sustainability effects of motor control stabilisation exercises on pain and function in chronic nonspecific low back pain patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-21, January.
    5. Songsore, Emmanuel & Buzzelli, Michael, 2014. "Social responses to wind energy development in Ontario: The influence of health risk perceptions and associated concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 285-296.
    6. Hongwei Liu & Ronglu Yang & Zhixiang Zhou & Dacheng Huang, 2020. "Regional Green Eco-Efficiency in China: Considering Energy Saving, Pollution Treatment, and External Environmental Heterogeneity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    7. Sana Sadiq & Khadija Anasse & Najib Slimani, 2022. "The impact of mobile phones on high school students: connecting the research dots," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 30(1), pages 252-270, April.
    8. Jitka Vseteckova, 2020. "Psychological Therapy for ICT Literate Older Adults in the Time of COVID-19 - Perceptions on the Acceptability of Online Versus Face to Face Versions of a Mindfulness for Later Life Group," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 31(1), pages 23912-23916, October.
    9. Khalid Ahmed Al-Ansari & Ahmet Faruk Aysan, 2021. "More than ten years of Blockchain creation: How did we use the technology and which direction is the research heading? [Plus de dix ans de création Blockchain : Comment avons-nous utilisé la techno," Working Papers hal-03343048, HAL.
    10. Ling, Gabriel Hoh Teck & Suhud, Nur Amiera binti Md & Leng, Pau Chung & Yeo, Lee Bak & Cheng, Chin Tiong & Ahmad, Mohd Hamdan Haji & Matusin, AK Mohd Rafiq AK, 2021. "Factors Influencing Asia-Pacific Countries’ Success Level in Curbing COVID-19: A Review Using a Social–Ecological System (SES) Framework," SocArXiv b9f2w, Center for Open Science.
    11. Benedict E. DeDominicis, 2021. "Multinational Enterprises And Economic Nationalism: A Strategic Analysis Of Culture," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 15(1), pages 19-66.
    12. Robert J. R. Elliott & Ingmar Schumacher & Cees Withagen, 2020. "Suggestions for a Covid-19 Post-Pandemic Research Agenda in Environmental Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 1187-1213, August.
    13. Rafał Krupiński, 2020. "Virtual Reality System and Scientific Visualisation for Smart Designing and Evaluating of Lighting," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Emmanuel Songsore & Michael Buzzelli, 2016. "Ontario’s Experience of Wind Energy Development as Seen through the Lens of Human Health and Environmental Justice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    15. Werner Hölzl & Michael Böheim & Klaus Friesenbichler & Agnes Kügler & Thomas Leoni, 2021. "Staatliche Hilfsmaßnahmen für Unternehmen in der COVID-19-Krise. Eine begleitende Analyse operativer Aspekte und Unternehmenseinschätzungen," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 66624.
    16. Grant Lewison, 2007. "The reporting of the risks from genetically modified organisms in the mass media, 2002–2004," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 439-458, September.
    17. Thorbecke, Willem & Chen, Chen & Salike, Nimesh, 2021. "China’s exports in a protectionist world," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    18. Óscar Chiva-Bartoll & Honorato Morente-Oria & Francisco Tomás González-Fernández & Pedro Jesús Ruiz-Montero, 2020. "Anxiety and Bodily Pain in Older Women Participants in a Physical Education Program. A Multiple Moderated Mediation Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-12, May.
    19. Gigi Foster, 2020. "The behavioural economics of government responses to COVID-19," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S3), pages 11-43, December.
    20. Reza Salajegheh & Edward C Nemergut & Terran M Rice & Roy Joseph & Siny Tsang & Bethany M Sarosiek & C Paige Muthusubramanian & Katelyn M Hipwell & Kate B Horton & Bhiken I Naik, 2020. "Impact of a perioperative oral opioid substitution protocol during the nationwide intravenous opioid shortage: A single center, interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-13, June.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2723-:d:339007. 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.