IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0249058.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does living close to a petrochemical complex increase the adverse psychological effects of the COVID-19 lockdown?

Author

Listed:
  • Paloma Vicens
  • Luis Heredia
  • Edgar Bustamante
  • Yolanda Pérez
  • José L Domingo
  • Margarita Torrente

Abstract

The petrochemical industry has made the economic development of many local communities possible, increasing employment opportunities and generating a complex network of closely-related secondary industries. However, it is known that petrochemical industries emit air pollutants, which have been related to different negative effects on mental health. In addition, many people around the world are being exposed to highly stressful situations deriving from the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdowns adopted by national and regional governments. The present study aims to analyse the possible differential effects on various psychological outcomes (stress, anxiety, depression and emotional regulation strategies) stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent lockdown experienced by individuals living near an important petrochemical complex and subjects living in other areas, nonexposed to the characteristic environmental pollutants emitted by these kinds of complex. The sample consisted of 1607 subjects who answered an ad hoc questionnaire on lockdown conditions, the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS) and the Emotional Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ). The results indicate that people living closer to petrochemical complexes reported greater risk perception [K = 73.42, p

Suggested Citation

  • Paloma Vicens & Luis Heredia & Edgar Bustamante & Yolanda Pérez & José L Domingo & Margarita Torrente, 2021. "Does living close to a petrochemical complex increase the adverse psychological effects of the COVID-19 lockdown?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-22, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0249058
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0249058
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0249058&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0249058?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    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. Wang, Yu & Gu, Jibao & Wu, Jianlin, 2020. "Explaining local residents’ acceptance of rebuilding nuclear power plants: The roles of perceived general benefit and perceived local benefit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    2. Anneleen Kenis & Maarten Loopmans, 2022. "Just air? Spatial injustice and the politicisation of air pollution," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(3), pages 563-571, May.
    3. Dan Venables & Nick Pidgeon & Peter Simmons & Karen Henwood & Karen Parkhill, 2009. "Living with Nuclear Power: A Q‐Method Study of Local Community Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1089-1104, August.
    4. Miguel Ángel López‐Navarro & Vicente Tortosa‐Edo & Jaume Llorens‐Monzonís, 2015. "Environmental Management Systems and Local Community Perceptions: the Case of Petrochemical Complexes Located in Ports," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 236-251, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Aldred, Rachel & Tepe, Daniela, 2011. "Framing scrappage in Germany and the UK: from climate discourse to recession talk?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1563-1569.
    7. 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.
    8. Wouter Poortinga & Patrick Cox & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2008. "The Perceived Health Risks of Indoor Radon Gas and Overhead Powerlines: A Comparative Multilevel Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 235-248, February.
    9. van der Horst, Dan, 2007. "NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2705-2714, May.
    10. Marciano, James A. & Lilieholm, Robert J. & Teisl, Mario F. & Leahy, Jessica E. & Neupane, Binod, 2014. "Factors affecting public support for forest-based biorefineries: A comparison of mill towns and the general public in Maine, USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 301-311.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0249058. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.