IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v76y2018icp553-564.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Land use: The perception of risk by the citizens and local administrators in the North of Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Cabini, Emanuele
  • Fontana, Luca
  • Malavasi, Pierluigi
  • Iavicoli, Ivo

Abstract

Soil is a non-renewable resource and a very dynamic system, which delivers vital services to human activities for example guaranteeing food autonomy of countries and ecosystems survival. Nevertheless, in recent years the “land use”, a negative and multidimensional phenomenon that still does not have a univocal definition, has become a critical issue. The most evident characteristics of this issue are represented by the expansion of urban areas (urban sprawl) and the impermeability of agricultural land and natural areas, which often occurs in valuable plain areas, which are most fertile and productive. The knowledge and the analysis of technical and objective data are essential to understand the evolution of “land use” but, on the other hand, it is equally important to undertake research on the perception of this phenomenon in citizens and local administrators. In this regard, we assessed the dimensions of “land use” in a definite territory of northern Italy and evaluated the perception of this problem in citizens and local administrators of the same geographical area. The results of our study showed that raising awareness in the population is a very helpful tool to stimulate sustainable actions oriented to human development. A new cultural paradigm could help to encourage reflection on local sustainability and new policies that go farther than individual administrative mandates, promoting social responsibility of local administrators towards future generations.

Suggested Citation

  • Cabini, Emanuele & Fontana, Luca & Malavasi, Pierluigi & Iavicoli, Ivo, 2018. "Land use: The perception of risk by the citizens and local administrators in the North of Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 553-564.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:76:y:2018:i:c:p:553-564
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837717309006
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.036?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
    ---><---

    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. Dirk Vrebos & Francesca Bampa & Rachel E. Creamer & Ciro Gardi & Bhim Bahadur Ghaley & Arwyn Jones & Michiel Rutgers & Taru Sandén & Jan Staes & Patrick Meire, 2017. "The Impact of Policy Instruments on Soil Multifunctionality in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Lennart Sjöberg, 2000. "Factors in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Hikmet Günal & Tayfun Korucu & Marta Birkas & Engin Özgöz & Rares Halbac-Cotoara-Zamfir, 2015. "Threats to Sustainability of Soil Functions in Central and Southeast Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-28, February.
    4. Nadia Glæsner & Katharina Helming & Wim De Vries, 2014. "Do Current European Policies Prevent Soil Threats and Support Soil Functions?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-26, December.
    5. Douglas L. Karlen & Charles W. Rice, 2015. "Soil Degradation: Will Humankind Ever Learn?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-12, September.
    6. Chris M. R. Smerecnik & Ilse Mesters & Math J. J. M. Candel & Hein De Vries & Nanne K. De Vries, 2012. "Risk Perception and Information Processing: The Development and Validation of a Questionnaire to Assess Self‐Reported Information Processing," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 54-66, January.
    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. Yan Deng & Guiwu Su & Na Gao & Lei Sun, 2019. "Perceptions of earthquake emergency response and rescue in China: a comparison between experts and local practitioners," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 97(2), pages 643-664, June.
    2. Zhaoxia Guo & Qinqin Guo & Yujie Cai & Ge Wang, 2021. "Unraveling Risk Networks of Cultivated Land Protection: An Exploratory Stakeholder-Oriented Case Study in Xiliuhe Town, Hubei Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, November.
    3. Yan, Jinming & Zhang, Dongsheng & Xia, Fangzhou, 2021. "Evaluation of village land use planning risks in green concepts: The case of Qiwangfen Village in Beijing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    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. Rudi Hessel & Guido Wyseure & Ioanna S. Panagea & Abdallah Alaoui & Mark S. Reed & Hedwig van Delden & Melanie Muro & Jane Mills & Oene Oenema & Francisco Areal & Erik van den Elsen & Simone Verzandvo, 2022. "Soil-Improving Cropping Systems for Sustainable and Profitable Farming in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-27, May.
    2. Tiankui Li & Yi Liu & Sijie Lin & Yangze Liu & Yunfeng Xie, 2019. "Soil Pollution Management in China: A Brief Introduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    3. Dirk Vrebos & Francesca Bampa & Rachel E. Creamer & Ciro Gardi & Bhim Bahadur Ghaley & Arwyn Jones & Michiel Rutgers & Taru Sandén & Jan Staes & Patrick Meire, 2017. "The Impact of Policy Instruments on Soil Multifunctionality in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Luis Abdón Cifuentes & Michael L. deKay & Henry H. Willis, 2007. "Accounting for Variation in the Explanatory Power of the Psychometric Paradigm: The Effects of Aggregation and Focus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 527-554, June.
    5. Michalis Diakakis & Dimitris G. Damigos & Andreas Kallioras, 2020. "Identification of Patterns and Influential Factors on Civil Protection Personnel Opinions and Views on Different Aspects of Flood Risk Management: The Case of Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-20, July.
    6. Valentina Carfora & Patrizia Catellani, 2022. "Advertising Innovative Sustainable Fashion: Informational, Transformational, or Sustainability Appeal?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-21, December.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:3:p:513-546 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. B. J. M. Ale, 2005. "Tolerable or Acceptable: A Comparison of Risk Regulation in the United Kingdom and in the Netherlands," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 231-241, April.
    9. Cristina Oana Stan & Radu Gabriel Pîrnău & Bogdan Roșca & Doina Smaranda Sirbu-Radasanu, 2022. "Risk of Salinization in the Agricultural Soils of Semi-Arid Regions: A Case Study from Moldavian Plain (NE Romania)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Tianlong Yu & Hao Yang & Xiaowei Luo & Yifeng Jiang & Xiang Wu & Jingqi Gao, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Disaster Risk Perception: 2000–2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-19, December.
    11. S. A. Mashi & A. I. Inkani & Oghenejeabor Obaro & A. S. Asanarimam, 2020. "Community perception, response and adaptation strategies towards flood risk in a traditional African city," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 103(2), pages 1727-1759, September.
    12. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    13. Jantsje M. Mol & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Julia E. Blasch & Hans de Moel, 2020. "Insights into Flood Risk Misperceptions of Homeowners in the Dutch River Delta," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(7), pages 1450-1468, July.
    14. Henry H. Willis & Michael L. DeKay & Baruch Fischhoff & M. Granger Morgan, 2005. "Aggregate, Disaggregate, and Hybrid Analyses of Ecological Risk Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 405-428, April.
    15. Hannah Eboh & Courtney Gallaher & Thomas Pingel & Walker Ashley, 2021. "Risk perception in small island developing states: a case study in the Commonwealth of Dominica," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 105(1), pages 889-914, January.
    16. Juan Antonio Villarreal Sanchez & Lourdes Diaz Jimenez & Jose Concepcion Escobedo Bocardo & Jose Omar Cardenas Palomo & Nereida Elizabeth Guerra Escamilla & Jesus Salvador Luna Alvarez, 2018. "Effect of Marine Microorganisms on Limestone as an Approach for Calcareous Soil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-11, June.
    17. Yuan Quan & Chenxing Wang & Yan Yan & Gang Wu & Hongxun Zhang, 2016. "Impact of Inter‐Basin Water Transfer Projects on Regional Ecological Security from a Telecoupling Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-12, February.
    18. Mathew P. White & J. Richard Eiser & Peter R. Harris & Sabine Pahl, 2007. "Who Reaps the Benefits, Who Bears the Risks? Comparative Optimism, Comparative Utility, and Regulatory Preferences for Mobile Phone Technology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 741-753, June.
    19. Till Hermanns & Katharina Helming & Katharina Schmidt & Hannes Jochen König & Heiko Faust, 2015. "Stakeholder Strategies for Sustainability Impact Assessment of Land Use Scenarios: Analytical Framework and Identifying Land Use Claims," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-29, September.
    20. Hope, Aimie L.B. & Jones, Christopher R., 2014. "The impact of religious faith on attitudes to environmental issues and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies: A mixed methods study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 48-59.
    21. Matt Baucum & Heather Rosoff & Richard John & William Burns & Paul Slovic, 2018. "Modeling public responses to soft-target transportation terror," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 239-249, June.

    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:lauspo:v:76:y:2018:i:c:p:553-564. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.