Public perceptions of environmental risk in China

China, as a ‘double risk’ society, is in urgent need for effective environmental risk management systems. Compared with other risks, man-made environmental risks have not been given due weight. Public awareness and perceptions of environmental risks are crucial in all phases of effective risk management. However, little is known about public perceptions of environmental risks in China. To contribute to better understanding of public perception of environmental risk, a questionnaire survey was conducted among university students in Beijing, who represent a group with high level of education and a generally high sensitivity to new information. The results show that even this group has limited knowledge about environmental risks and current risk management systems. Further studies are needed to understand the social construction of environmental risks in China and to seek ways to involve the Chinese public in emergency response and risk management.     

Influences of individual-level characteristics on risk perceptions to various categories of environmental health and safety risks

Over the last five decades, social science researchers have examined how the public perceives the risks associated with a variety of environmental health and safety (EHS) hazards. The body of literature that has been emerged diverse both in the methodology employed to collect and analyze data and in the subject of study. The findings have confirmed that risk perceptions vary between groups of individuals as well as between categories of EHS risks. However, the extant literature on EHS risk perceptions has failed to provide empirical insights into how risk perceptions can be best explained according to the interplay of both (1) the category of EHS hazard appraised and (2) the prominent individual-level characteristics that best explain observed risk perception differences. This study addresses this deficiency in the literature by providing insights into the individual and cumulative roles that various individual-level variables play in characterizing risk perceptions to various categories of EHS risks including ‘agentic risks’ like street drug use and cigarette smoking, ‘emerging technological risks’ like nanoparticles and cloning, and ‘manufacturing risks’ like air and chemical pollution. Our data are drawn from the 2009 Citizens, Science, and Emerging Technologies national study of United States households that investigated public perceptions of EHS risks, traditional and emerging media use, and various individual characteristics like personal demographics, socioeconomic factors, and perceptual filters. The findings show that some categories of EHS risks like those associated with emerging technologies may be more easily predicted than other categories of risks and that individual-level characteristics vary in their explanative power between risk categories even among a single sample of respondents.     

Consumer reactions to unfamiliar technologies: mental and social formation of perceptions and attitudes toward nano and GM products

Abstract

Using focus groups, the research analyses the mental and social processes through which consumers form perceptions and opinions about unfamiliar technologies and the derived products, taking the perception of nanotechnology and nano-products, GM and GM products as example. Our findings suggest that limited understanding of the technological principles and lack of (visible) products prevent the formation of experience-based attitudes and behavioral intentions. In this context, consumers interpret and assess cognitive interventions such as product labels or product information, as well as the trustworthiness of unfamiliar information sources, based on heuristic clues, association, mutual reassurance and previous attitudes. The established determinants of technology risk perception (e.g. knowledge, social norms, perceived risks and benefits and controllability) were the subject of constant deliberation and negotiation among participants. Consequently, the perception of risk and technology communication interventions might vary greatly across different locations and segments of the public, complicating risk communication and trust-building.     

A life history approach to perceptions of global climate change risk: young adults’ experiences about impacts,causes, and solutions

Although the general acceptance of human-influenced global climate change within the technical sphere of science is important to consider, public perceptions of global climate change risks, impacts, causes, and solutions are as important to policy actions as scientific findings. Yet, studies analyzing climate change risk perceptions suffer from a number of limitations or use only a handful of approaches. Using a limited life history approach, this article answers calls for additional qualitative approaches in risk perception research. This article (1) introduces risk perception researchers to the limited life history method; (2) discovers that young adults articulate climate change solutions at the individual level, often as consumers, and blend their responses to climate change risks and advocacy for solutions with a general, environmentally friendly orientation, a ‘green posture;’ and (3) contends the key sources informing young adults’ perceptions about climate change risk have changed significantly from previous studies.     

A characterisation of the methodology of qualitative research on the nature of perceived risk: trends and omissions

The issue of how risk is ‘perceived’ is one of significant research interest and immense practical importance. In spite of this wide interest, however, it is probably fair to say that most emerging ‘risk’ crises – whether related to natural or technological phenomena – come as a surprise to researchers and to society as a whole. Prediction of human responses to novel potential hazards (or novel manifestations of old hazards) is neither reliable nor complete; strategies to ameliorate inappropriate concerns when they arise (or to make realistic inappropriate absences of concern) do not appear totally effective. It therefore seems apt to ask the question: just what have we learned about ‘risk perception’? In this paper we conduct a structured review of qualitative research on perceived risk – to be followed by a subsequent analysis of quantitative research in a later paper – focusing upon methodological issues. Qualitative research often precedes quantitative research, and ideally informs it; it seeks depth and meaning from few subjects rather than identifying patterns within larger samples and populations. Without adequate qualitative research, quantitative research risks misanalysis of the target phenomenon, at the very least by the omission of relevant factors and inclusion of irrelevant ones. Our analysis here – of qualitative studies conducted across a range of disciplines, not all of which will be familiar to the readers of this journal – suggests that this research suffers from an incomplete coverage of the ‘risk perception universe’, typified by a focus on atypical hazards and study samples. We summarise the results of this research, while pointing out its limitations, and draw conclusions about future priorities for research of this type.     

The end of risk communication as we know it

According to the US National Research Council, risk communication ought to be viewed as a dialogue among people conducted to help facilitate a more accurate understanding of risks and, related, the decisions they may make to manage them. But, in spite of this widely accepted perspective on risk communication, there is often a disconnect between how it is defined and how it is practiced. Rather than focusing on a true dialogue aimed at improving risk assessments and risk management decisions, risk communication is often viewed as means of simply educating people about existing risk assessments so that, on their own, they might make (or contribute to) better risk management decisions. More worrisome, risk communication is still often seen as a means of ‘correcting’ misconceptions about, or perceptions of, risk; in other words, risk communication is used as a vehicle for attempting to align lay perceptions with their expertly assessed severity. In this paper, I argue that risk communication must become more decision-focused if it is to meet the objectives set forth – in 1989 – by the US National Research Council.     

Engineered nanomaterials: risk perception,regulation and insurance

Concerns surrounding the health risk of engineered nanomaterials, effective regulation and the lack of specifically tailored insurance products for the nanotechnology sector are putting the industry’s long-term economic viability at risk. From the perspective of the underwriter, this article speculates on the relationship between risk perception, regulation and insurability. In the nanotechnology sector, regulators are currently failing to keep pace with innovation, and insurers generally lack guiding principles for underwriting occupational risk from nanomaterial exposure. Such vulnerabilities when combined with misguided risk perceptions can lead to the overpricing of risk transfer and ill-conceived regulatory initiatives, thus potentially exhausting resources and stifling innovation in the sector. In the absence of well-developed regulatory protocols, the insurance industry has, and will continue, to occupy a key role as an effective lobby in terms of improved risk management practice. We suggest that the insurance industry will increasingly rely on control banding frameworks and ‘risk mitigation at source’ methods developed in conjunction with their clients to manage severe acute diversifiable risks. Long tail risk will continue to represent a serious challenge to insurers and regulators. In the meantime, insurers will have to bridge their current needs with improvised solutions. As an example of one possible solution, we outline a framework that utilizes financial instruments to hedge an insurer’s exposure to uncertain estimates of these long-term risks.     

What role for social scientists in risk expertise?

When it comes to risks – health and environmental risks, like those linked to the use of nanotechnologies, pesticides, etc. – three main groups of actors are easily identified, brought together through boundary organisations such as environmental and sanitary risk agencies: the natural and technical scientists, who provide their expertise to assess risks (especially toxicologists, epidemiologists and microbiologists); the policy makers, who take decisions regarding risk management and risk regulation; the lay public, who are more and more involved in participatory frameworks. Sometimes three other groups of actors are added: the ‘economists’ who can for instance conduct cost–benefit assessments or multi-criteria analyses (especially ecological economists, public economists, political economists and social economists); the ‘philosophers’/‘ethicists’ who can use ethics to highlight moral choices and responsibilities in face of risks; and the ‘jurists’/‘legal experts’ who can justify authorisation or interdiction according to law. Inversely, there is a group of actors which is not clearly identified, that of social scientists, even though a considerable quantity of social science knowledge on risk has been produced. Why is there such a discrepancy? This article, based on a critical review of the literature, aims to make sense of the fuzziness surrounding the involvement of social scientists when it comes to risk expertise. The article shows that one reason for this puzzling situation is to be found in the gap between what social scientists often want to do when they are called in as risk experts and what natural scientists and public policy makers actually expect from them.     

The stability of risk and benefit perceptions: a longitudinal study assessing the perception of biotechnology

The study of public perceptions is considered to be important for making sound policy decisions, since the public decides which products will enter and sustain in the market. Stability of public perceptions is important for policy-makers; only if public attitudes and perceptions remain constant, policy-makers will be able to take them into account. The aim of the present study was to examine the stability of participants’ risk and benefit perceptions of gene technology over a period of two years. In spring, 2008 and in spring, 2010, the same sample of participants filled out an identical questionnaire. Results of structural equation modelling show that risk and benefit perceptions of gene technology applications are moderately stable (r = .5–.7). Furthermore, results show that people distinguish between medical, plant and food applications and applications involving animals when evaluating the risk of gene technology. When evaluating the benefits, participants also take consumer-related benefits into account, such as enhancement of functional properties. Results of the present study suggest that risk research should regularly examine people’s risk perceptions in order to gain a clearer picture of the dynamics of people’s perception and preferences not only of novel technologies, but also of entrenched technologies.     

Determinants of stakeholders’ attitudes towards a new technology: nanotechnology applications for food,water, energy and medicine

Stakeholder risk and benefit perceptions and attitudes towards a technology matter for the societal response to these technologies. This is especially the case for technological innovations where the public has no direct experience with the technology and its applications. In such cases, expert views are the main source for public opinion formation. Stakeholder risk and benefit perception, and their effect on attitudes towards a new technology (nanotechnology) and its applications were examined in two studies. In a survey, the effect of risk and benefit perception on attitudes to nanotechnology in specific application domains (energy, water, food and medicine) was examined. While risk and benefit perception predicted much of the variance in attitude, experts were more positive about medicine applications and more negative about food applications than could be explained through risk and benefit perception. In the second study, expert focus groups were asked for reasons why food and medicine were seen as more negative and positive than based on the risk and benefit perceptions as measured in the survey. For medicine, the urgency and unique potential of nanotechnology was seen as a reason as why this domain was liked more. For food, the high level of uncertainty about risk assessment and about exposure of consumers and the lack of urgency in applying nanotechnology to food was seen as a reason this domain was liked less. In addition, experts voiced concern about potential negative public response to food applications as reasons for their negative attitude. These results thus suggest that both risk and benefit perception consist of multiple dimensions that require further exploration.     

Looking for a safe haven after fancy thrills: a psychometric analysis of risk perception in alpine tourist destinations

Visitors’ risk perceptions have been found to influence the on‐site behaviour of tourists and their intention to return to a destination or to recommend it to others. The present study analyses the perception of tourism risks in the Tyrol, Austria. Building on the psychometric paradigm, participants (N = 207) assessed 15 vacation risks on nine risk characteristics that are derived from psychometric research and completed with characteristics relevant in a tourism context. Findings suggest that additionally to managing the most likely risks, alpine destinations should be prepared to cope with worst case scenarios such as ‘potable water poisoning’, ‘food poisoning’, ‘breaking of an embankment dam’, ‘rock fall on a village’, ‘cable car accident’ and ‘terrorist attack’. Considering these rather low‐probability risks is of decisive importance since such risks are especially prone to evoke public outrage if they – against all expectations – result in damaging events.     

Risk as perceived by the German public: pervasive risks and “switching” risks

In 2001, a major project on the perception and evaluation of risks in southern Germany was conducted consisting of survey data as well as of semi‐structured interviews. With reference to the psychometric paradigm, this article analyzes public risk perception, pointing out the perceived risk semantic for nuclear energy, GM‐food, mad cow disease (BSE), crime, global climate change, mobile telephony and its radiation risks. These hazards reveal different patterns of risk perception and different levels of risk acceptability. Secondly, a comparison of qualitative and quantitative findings will be conducted: qualitative analyses indicate that the results of quantitative rating scales on the perception, evaluation and acceptance of technical and environmental hazards might be misleading since the public's focus on risks as elicited by open association stimuli relies much more on ‘everyday‐life’ and ‘pervasive’ risks than for instance on hazards emerging from new technologies. The relevance of technological risks tends to be dependent on the context: If explicitly mentioned in newscasts, in debates or listed in questionnaires memories, fears or other immediate responses become activated, yet they may be forgotten a short time later. We have called this phenomenon “switching effect” and the respective risks “switching risks”. In standardized opinion polls such ‘switching effects’ may evoke firm judgments, even if the importance in the interviewee's mental representation seems marginal.     

Evaluation of psychosocial and organizational factors in offshore safety: a comparative study

This study compares UK and Norwegian offshore workers' evaluations of social and organizational factors that can have an impact upon safety on offshore installations. A total of 1138 Norwegian (87% response rate) and 622 UK workers (40% response rate) responded to a self-completion questionnaire, which was distributed to 18 installations in February/March 1994. The questionnaire contained six scales that were suitable and relevant for the purposes of comparison. These scales measured ‘risk perception’, ‘satisfaction with safety measures’, ‘perceptions of the job situation’, ‘attitudes to safety’, ‘perceptions of others' commitment to safety’ and ‘perceptions of social support’. The data show clear differences in how UK and Norwegian workers evaluate various social and organizational factors that can have an impact upon safety, however, eta² analysis indicated that for most of the scales ‘installation’ explained a greater percentage of the variance than sector. The exceptions to this were scales measuring ‘safety attitudes’ where both sector and installation contributed equally to the effects. Although the results from the ‘safety attitudes’ scales should be interpreted with caution (due to low internal reliability), it is possible that they are tapping into more deeply held beliefs about the nature of safety, e.g. ‘fatalism’ and the ‘causes of accidents’. In contrast, the other scales are measuring factors directly related to the working environment such as perceptions of risk and satisfaction with safety measures on the installation. These may reflect the prevailing ‘safety climate’ or ‘atmosphere’ on the installations surveyed, whereas constructs such as ‘fatalism’, etc. may be reflections of underlying ‘cultural’ values. Recognizing the existence of different ‘safety cultures’ and understanding the processes which lie behind them could have implications for safety management in an industry which is highly international in nature and in which workers' are often required to work in foreign countries for varying periods of time.     

Consequences of perceived risk: Demand for mitigation

The theory of risk society claims that ‘individualisation’ has led social class positions to loose their significance in explaining risk and risk perceptions in late modernity. Using social survey data from England, this proposition was put to an empirical test for three types of risks: income loss, accident or illness, and poor customer service or advice. Regression analyses revealed that class position only affected perceptions of the risk of income loss, whereas the risks of accidents or illness and of poor customer service or advice were strongly shaped by welfare and value orientations. While other indicators of individualisation derived from the data failed to explain variations in risk perceptions, the strongest effect on current risk perceptions was the experience of risk events in the past, and awareness of and drawing on support systems. The findings demonstrate the need for risk theory to differentiate between types of risks and to draw out more clearly their sociological contexts in order to grasp fully the nature of perceptions of risk prevailing in late modern society.     

Optimism and the perceptions of new risks

While many risks, especially new ones, are not objectively quantifiable, individuals still form perceptions of risks using incomplete or unclear evidence about the true nature of those risks. In the case of well known risks, such as smoking, individuals perceive risks to be smaller for themselves than others, exhibiting ‘optimism bias’. Although existing evidence supports optimism bias occurring in the case of risks about which individuals are familiar, evidence does not yet exist to suggest that optimism bias applies for new risks. This paper addresses this question by examining the gap in perceptions of risks individuals have for themselves versus society and the environment, conceptualised as social and/or environmental optimism biases. We draw upon the 2002 UEA‐MORI Risk Survey to examine the existence of optimism bias and its effects on risk perceptions and acceptance regarding five science and technology‐related topics: climate change, mobile phones, radioactive waste, GM food and genetic testing. Our findings provide evidence of social and environmental optimism bias following similar patterns and optimism bias appearing greater for those risks bringing sizeable benefit to individuals (e.g. mobile phone radiation) rather than those more acutely affecting society or the environment (e.g. GM food or climate change). Social optimism bias is found to reduce risk perceptions for risks that have received large amounts of media attention, namely, climate change and GM food. On the other hand, optimism bias appears to increase risk perceptions about genetic testing.     

Drivers of flood and climate change risk perceptions and intention to adapt: an explorative survey in coastal and delta Vietnam

Abstract

This article contributes to current research about determinants of climate change and flood risk perception, and intentions to take adaptive measures. We propose a research model that distinguishes between vulnerability and severity components of perceived risks, and adds perceived adaptive capacity as a third factor to predict the intention to take adaptive measures. We used this combined model as a conceptual lens for an explorative survey among 1086 residents of coastal and delta communities in Vietnam. Pairwise analyses revealed a significant association of flood and climate change risk perceptions with individual’s flood experience, climate change knowledge, frequency of community participation and socio-demographic factors. However, in multivariate analysis, the influence of most socio-demographic factors became weak or patchy. Flood experience was the most influential driver of flood-related risk perceptions but weak for climate change-related risk perceptions and behavioural intentions. Knowledge strongly increased the intention to adapt to flood and climate risks and the perceived vulnerability to and severity of climate change risks, but reduced the perceived capacity to adapt to climate risks. Frequency of community participation increased the perceived vulnerability and severity of climate change risks, the intention to adapt to both climate and flood risks and the perceived capacity to adapt to flood risks, but reduced the perceived capacity to adapt to climate risks. Our research confirms earlier findings that individuals’ knowledge, place-specific experience and social-cultural influences are key predictors of both flood and climate change risk perceptions and intentions to take adaptive measures. These factors should therefore receive ample attention in climate risk communication.     

Reliability rating and reflective questioning: a case study of extended review on Australia's risk assessment of Bt cotton

The governance of emerging technologies is frequently constructed around risk assessment processes. However, when risk assessment as a decision‐making tool is applied to controversial fields such as genetic modification, stem cell research and nano‐scaled science and technology, inherent uncertainties and conflicting social values arise to challenge the adequacy of traditional approaches. In this paper, I propose a framework through which risk assessments may be exposed to a process of ‘extended review’, incorporating both natural and social science quality criteria and modes of reflection. I call this framework ‘Reliability Rating and Reflective Questioning’. The framework is developed through a detailed case study review of a particular risk assessment document. The case study risk assessment reviewed in this paper is that performed by an Australian governmental authority on the impact of genetically modified ‘Bt’ cotton on non‐target organisms. Through highlighting errors, misrepresentations, assumptions and embedded value judgements within the risk assessment document, I argue that the framework of ‘Reliability Rating and Reflective Questioning’ can serve as a useful tool for gauging and improving the quality of risk assessment, especially when used as a decision‐making tool for emerging technologies with high levels of uncertainty and strongly conflicting values.     

Public sector risk managers and spending cuts: mitigating risks

This paper reports case study research, the results of which are used to consider whether councils have recognised the potentially substantially increased social risks they may create as they seek to reduce their spending in line with the UK Government’s programme of public sector austerity. It discusses the conceptual shift in the public sector risk management literature towards social risk management (SRM), presents empirical evidence of social risks and considers the approach to SRM developed by other organisations. It finds no evidence of SRM within the case study authorities and so advocates a shift in the public sector risk management culture from a preoccupation with defensive-institutional risk management practices to a more proactive social dimension. In so doing, it discusses the goals of SRM, the constraints limiting their achievement, metrics for measuring social risk, tools for mitigating social risk and the problems faced when operationalising SRM.     

Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases

Important determinants of risk perceptions associated with foods are the extent to which the potential hazards are perceived to have technological or naturally occurring origins, together with the acute vs. chronic dimension in which the potential hazard is presented (acute or chronic). This study presents a case study analysis based on an extensive literature review examining how these hazard characteristics affect people’s risk and benefit perceptions, and associated attitudes and behaviors. The cases include E. coli incidences (outbreaks linked to fresh spinach and fenugreek sprouts), contamination of fish by environmental pollutants, (organochlorine contaminants in farmed salmon), radioactive contamination of food following a nuclear accident (the Fukushima accident in Japan), and GM salmon destined for the human food chain. The analysis of the cases over the acute vs. chronic dimension suggests that longitudinal quantification of the relationship between risk perceptions and impacts is important for both acute and chronic food safety, but this has infrequently been applied to chronic hazards. Technologies applied to food production tend to potentially be associated with higher levels of risk perception, linked to perceptions that the risk is unnatural. However, for some risks (e.g. those involving biological irreversibility), moral or ethical concerns may be more important determinants of consumer responses than risk or benefit perceptions. (Lack of) trust has been highlighted in all of the cases suggesting transparent and honest risk–benefit communications following the occurrence of a food safety incident. Implications for optimizing associated risk communication strategies, additional research linking risk perception, and other quantitative measures, including comparisons in time and space, are suggested.