IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i3p1438-d735140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Poor Air Quality in Urban Settings: A Comparison of Perceptual Indicators, Causes and Management in Two Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy M. Chukwu

    (Centre for Environment and Sustainability, Faculty of Physical Sciences and Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)

  • Stephen Morse

    (Centre for Environment and Sustainability, Faculty of Physical Sciences and Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)

  • Richard Murphy

    (Centre for Environment and Sustainability, Faculty of Physical Sciences and Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)

Abstract

Poor air quality (PAQ) is a global concern, especially in urban areas, and is often seen as an important element of social sustainability given its negative impact on health and quality of life. However, little research has been undertaken in cities of the developing world to explore how residents perceive poor air quality, its main causes, what control measures should be used to address PAQ and where the main responsibility rests for implementing control measures. The research described in this paper sought to address these points, using a questionnaire-based survey ( n = 262) in Nigeria’s federal capital city of Abuja ( n = 137) and the state-capital city of Enugu ( n = 125). The survey took place during the COVID-19 pandemic (October 2020 to March 2021), and was stratified to ensure representation across a number of demographic groups such as gender, age, education and income. The results were analysed using the Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric test and Hochberg’s post hoc test available in SPSS version 28. The study found that the ranking of perceptual indicators and the main causes of PAQ had much agreement between respondents from both cities and between demographic groups. Smoke, odour and dust particles were perceived to be the most important indicators of PAQ, while the main sources of PAQ were waste and bush burning, vehicle use and power generators. The two most preferred control measures were proper waste management and the avoidance of bush burning. However, there was a significant difference between the two cities in terms of the main organisations responsible for addressing PAQ, with respondents from Abuja citing the federal government, while those from Enugu cited the state government. Interestingly, younger people in Enugu noted that the government should take more responsibility in controlling PAQ than did the older demographic in that city, but this difference was not seen in Abuja. Overall, this study reveals that residents in these two Nigerian cities clearly recognise their exposure to PAQ and it suggests that these perceptual indicators, and views on sources and interventions should be central to designing policies to control this important issue.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy M. Chukwu & Stephen Morse & Richard Murphy, 2022. "Poor Air Quality in Urban Settings: A Comparison of Perceptual Indicators, Causes and Management in Two Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-29, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1438-:d:735140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1438/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1438/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Timothy M. Chukwu & Stephen Morse & Richard J. Murphy, 2022. "Spatial Analysis of Air Quality Assessment in Two Cities in Nigeria: A Comparison of Perceptions with Instrument-Based Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, April.
    2. Timothy M. Chukwu & Stephen Morse & Richard J. Murphy, 2023. "Perceived Health Impacts, Sources of Information and Individual Actions to Address Air Quality in Two Cities in Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-22, April.
    3. Izabela Konkol & Robert Tylingo & Szymon Mania & Adam Cenian, 2023. "Odour Perception Using a Sniffing Team at a Municipal Solid Waste Treatment Plant: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-17, August.
    4. Sezer, Muruvvet Deniz & Kazancoglu, Yigit & Mangla, Sachin Kumar, 2024. "Analysing of the territorial competitiveness index in Izmir through dynamic model," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).

    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:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1438-:d:735140. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.