Related Experiment Videos
How reassuring are risk comparisons to pollution standards and emission limits?
Branden B Johnson1, Caron Chess
1Bureau of Risk Analysis, Division of Science, Research and Technology, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton 08625-0409, USA. Johnson@dep.state.nj.us
Risk Analysis : an Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis
|September 13, 2003
Summary
Public health standards do not always reassure communities near industrial sites. Trust in industry and government, rather than knowledge, influences perceptions of pollution acceptability.
Area of Science:
- Environmental Health
- Risk Communication
- Sociology of Science
Background:
- Pollutant emissions are frequently justified using public health standards or permit limits.
- The effectiveness of these benchmarks in reassuring the public is often unexamined.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate whether comparisons to regulatory benchmarks reassure the public about pollution levels.
- To identify factors influencing public perception of industrial pollution risks.
Main Methods:
- Survey of residents living near New Jersey industrial facilities.
- Analysis of attitudes toward discharge limits and drinking water standards.
- Examination of responses to drinking water contamination scenarios.
Main Results:
- Approximately half of residents near industrial facilities were reassured by benchmark comparisons.
- Positive attitudes were linked to English speaking, perceived local industry benefits, and younger age.
- Lower concern was associated with perceived net benefits, being white, and non-English speaking, irrespective of treatment levels.
Conclusions:
- Trust, more than knowledge, appears to explain differing attitudes toward benchmark comparisons.
- Individuals distrustful of industry or government are less likely to accept regulatory benchmarks as valid risk comparisons.
- Further research is needed to fully understand the interplay of trust and knowledge in risk perception.