IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v102y2011i1p81-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation and equity audit of the domestic radon programme in England

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Wei
  • Chow, Yimmy
  • Meara, Jill
  • Green, Martyn

Abstract

The UK has a radon programme to limit the radon risk to health. This involves advice on protective measures in new buildings, technical guidance on their installation, encouragement of radon measurements and remediation in existing dwellings in high radon areas. We have audited the radon programme at the level of individual homes to identify factors that influence the likelihood of remediation. 49% of the householders responded to our survey and 30% of the respondents stated that they had done some remediation to reduce the indoor radon levels. We found that householders with higher incomes and higher socio-economic status are more likely than others to remediate. Householders are less likely to remediate if they have one of the following: living in a property with a high radon concentration, current smokers in the dwelling, being unemployed or an unskilled worker, long length of time living in that property or elderly (65+ years) living by themselves. Householders appeared to be more likely to remediate if they considered the information on radon and its risk to be very clear and useful. This emphasises the importance of communication with householders.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Wei & Chow, Yimmy & Meara, Jill & Green, Martyn, 2011. "Evaluation and equity audit of the domestic radon programme in England," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 81-88, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:102:y:2011:i:1:p:81-88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851010002770
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. V. Kerry Smith & William H. Desvousges & F. Reed Johnson & Ann Fisher, 1990. "Can public information programs affect risk perceptions?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(1), pages 41-59.
    2. Smith, V Kerry & Desvousges, William H & Payne, John W, 1995. "Do Risk Information Programs Promote Mitigating Behavior?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 203-221, May.
    3. Smith, V Kerry & Desvousges, William H. & Fisher, Ann & Johnson, F. Reed, 1988. "Learning about Radon's Risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 233-258, June.
    4. Denman, Antony Roger & Timson, Karen & Shield, George & Groves-Kirkby, Christopher John & Rogers, Stephen & Campbell, Jackie Ann & Phillips, Paul Scott, 2009. "Local health campaigns to reduce lung cancers induced by radon and smoking--Who responds?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(2-3), pages 201-206, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Edward W. Pinchbeck & Sefi Roth & Nikodem Szumilo & Enrico Vanino, 2023. "The Price of Indoor Air Pollution: Evidence from Risk Maps and the Housing Market," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(6), pages 1439-1473.
    2. Dacinia Crina Petrescu & Ruxandra Mălina Petrescu-Mag, 2017. "Setting the Scene for a Healthier Indoor Living Environment: Citizens’ Knowledge, Awareness, and Habits Related to Residential Radon Exposure in Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-19, November.

    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. Hoehn, John P. & Randall, Alan, 2002. "The effect of resource quality information on resource injury perceptions and contingent values," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 13-31, February.
    2. Coskeran, Thomas & Denman, Antony & Phillips, Paul, 2001. "The costs of radon mitigation in domestic properties," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 97-109, August.
    3. Trudy Cameron, 2005. "Updating Subjective Risks in the Presence of Conflicting Information: An Application to Climate Change," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 63-97, January.
    4. Robert S. Chirinko & Edward P. Harper, 1993. "Buckle up or slow down? New estimates of offsetting behavior and their implications for automobile safety regulation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(2), pages 270-296.
    5. Barbara A. Knuth & Nancy A. Connelly & Judy Sheeshka & Jacqueline Patterson, 2003. "Weighing Health Benefit and Health Risk Information when Consuming Sport‐Caught Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1185-1197, December.
    6. Poe, Gregory L. & Bishop, Richard C., 1992. "Measuring the Benefits of Groundwater Protection from Agricultural Contamination: Results from a Two-Stage Contingent Valuation Study," Staff Papers 200549, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    7. Gregory Poe & Richard Bishop, 1999. "Valuing the Incremental Benefits of Groundwater Protection when Exposure Levels are Known," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(3), pages 341-367, April.
    8. Georges Dionne & Claude Fluet & Denise Desjardins, 2007. "Predicted risk perception and risk-taking behavior: The case of impaired driving," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 237-264, December.
    9. Jalan, Jyotsna & Somanathan, E., 2008. "The importance of being informed: Experimental evidence on demand for environmental quality," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 14-28, August.
    10. Sun, Cong & Kahn, Matthew E. & Zheng, Siqi, 2017. "Self-protection investment exacerbates air pollution exposure inequality in urban China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 468-474.
    11. Rekola, Mika & Pouta, Eija, 2005. "Public preferences for uncertain regeneration cuttings: a contingent valuation experiment involving Finnish private forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 635-649, May.
    12. Peter J. May, 1991. "Addressing public risks: Federal earthquake policy design," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(2), pages 263-285.
    13. Collins, J. Michael & Simon, Kosali I. & Tennyson, Sharon, 2013. "Drug withdrawals and the utilization of therapeutic substitutes: The case of Vioxx," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 148-168.
    14. Jyotsna Jalan & E.Somanathan, 2004. "Being informed matters: Experimental evidence on the demand for environmental quality," Discussion Papers 04-08, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    15. Lori Bennear & Alessandro Tarozzi & Alexander Pfaff & H. B. Soumya & Kazi Matin Ahmed & Alexander van Geen, 2010. "Bright Lines, Risk Beliefs, and Risk Avoidance: Evidence from a Randomized Intervention in Bangladesh," Working Papers 10-77, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    16. Konstantinos Drakos & Catherine Mueller, 2014. "On the Determinants of Terrorism Risk Concern in Europe," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 291-310, June.
    17. W. Kip Viscusi & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2015. "The Relative Weights of Direct and Indirect Experiences in the Formation of Environmental Risk Beliefs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 318-331, February.
    18. Poe, Gregory L. & Bishop, Richard C., 1992. "Prior Information, General Information, and Specific Information in the Contingent Valuation of Environmental Risks: The Case of Nitrates in Groundwater," Staff Papers 121335, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    19. Alain Carpentier & Dominique Vermersch, 1997. "Measuring willingness to pay for drinking water quality using the econometrics of equivalence scales [Mesure du consentement à payer pour une qualité d'eau potable au moyen de la méthode économétri," Post-Print hal-02841037, HAL.
    20. Shiping Liu & Ju‐Chin Huang & Gregory L. Brown, 1998. "Information and Risk Perception: A Dynamic Adjustment Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 689-699, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Radon Health Equity Audit;

    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:eee:hepoli:v:102:y:2011:i:1:p:81-88. 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: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    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.