IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v13y2016i4p410-d67837.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regional Variations of Public Perception on Contaminated Industrial Sites in China and Its Influencing Factors

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaonuo Li

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Wentao Jiao

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Rongbo Xiao

    (Guangdong Provincial Academy of Environmental Science, Guangzhou 510045, China)

  • Weiping Chen

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Yanying Bai

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

Abstract

Public involvement is critical in sustainable contaminated site management. It is important for China to improve public knowledge and participation, foster dialogue between urban managers and laypeople, and accelerate the remediation and redevelopment processes in contaminated site management. In this study, we collected 1812 questionnaires from nine cities around China through face-to-face interviews and statistically analyzed the perception of residents concerning contaminated sites. The results show that respondents’ concern about soil pollution was lower than for other environmental issues and their knowledge of soil contamination was limited. The risks posed by contaminated industrial sites were well recognized by respondents, but they were unsatisfied with the performance of local agencies regarding information disclosure, publicity and education and public participation. Respondents believed that local governments and polluters should take the primary responsibility for contaminated site remediation. Most of them were unwilling to pay for contaminated site remediation and preferred recreational or public service redevelopment. Moreover, our research indicated that public perception varied among different cities. This variation was mainly determined by implementations of policy instruments and additionally affected by remediation technology, pollutant type, regional policy response and living distance.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaonuo Li & Wentao Jiao & Rongbo Xiao & Weiping Chen & Yanying Bai, 2016. "Regional Variations of Public Perception on Contaminated Industrial Sites in China and Its Influencing Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:13:y:2016:i:4:p:410-:d:67837
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/4/410/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/4/410/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Turvani, Margherita & Chiabai, Aline & Alberini, Anna & Tonin, Stefania, 2007. "Public Policies for Contaminated Site Cleanup: The Opinions of the Italian Public," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 10276, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. J. Richard Eiser & Tom Stafford & John Henneberry & Philip Catney, 2009. "“Trust me, I'm a Scientist (Not a Developer)”: Perceived Expertise and Motives as Predictors of Trust in Assessment of Risk from Contaminated Land," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 288-297, February.
    3. Frédéric Vandermoere, 2008. "Hazard Perception, Risk Perception, and the Need for Decontamination by Residents Exposed to Soil Pollution: The Role of Sustainability and the Limits of Expert Knowledge," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 387-398, April.
    4. Anna Alberini & Stefania Tonin & Margherita Turvani & Aline Chiabai, 2007. "Paying for permanence: Public preferences for contaminated site cleanup," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 155-178, April.
    5. Jian Xie & Fasheng Li, 2010. "Overview of the Current Situation on Brownfield Remediation and Redevelopment in China," World Bank Publications - Reports 2933, The World Bank Group.
    6. Olaf Weber & Roland W. Scholz & Renate Bühlmann & Dirk Grasmück, 2001. "Risk Perception of Heavy Metal Soil Contamination and Attitudes toward Decontamination Strategies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 967-967, October.
    7. Anna Alberini & Stefania Tonin & Margherita Turvani, 2007. "Willingness to Pay for Contaminated Site Cleanup Policies : Evidence from a Conjoint Choice Study in Italy," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 117(5), pages 737-749.
    8. Stefania Tonin & Margherita Turvani & Anna Alberini, 2011. "Knowledge About, Importance of, and Attitudes Towards Industrial Brownfield Re-use," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2011(3), pages 97-126.
    9. Anna Alberini & Aline Chiabai & Margherita Turvani & Stefania Tonin, 2006. "Public Support for Policies Addressing Contaminated Sites: Evidence From a Survey of the Italian Public," ERSA conference papers ersa06p651, European Regional Science Association.
    10. Vandermoere, Frédéric, 2008. "Psychosocial health of residents exposed to soil pollution in a Flemish neighbourhood," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(7), pages 1646-1657, April.
    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. Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi & Alexander Brem, 2018. "Antecedents of Corporate Environmental Commitments: The Role of Customers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-10, June.

    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. Anna Alberini & Stefania Tonin & Margherita Turvani & Aline Chiabai, 2007. "Paying for permanence: Public preferences for contaminated site cleanup," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 155-178, April.
    2. Alberini, Anna & Tonin, Stefania & Turvani, Margherita, 2009. "Rates of Time Preferences for Saving Lives in the Hazardous Waste Site Context," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 47177, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    3. Zhongjun Tang & Zengli Guo & Li Zhou & Shengguo Xue & Qinfeng Zhu & Huike Zhu, 2016. "Combined and Relative Effect Levels of Perceived Risk, Knowledge, Optimism, Pessimism, and Social Trust on Anxiety among Inhabitants Concerning Living on Heavy Metal Contaminated Soil," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Hung‐Chih Hung & Tzu‐Wen Wang, 2011. "Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 668-683, April.
    5. Anna Alberini & Aline Chiabai & Margherita Turvani & Stefania Tonin, 2006. "Public Support for Policies Addressing Contaminated Sites: Evidence From a Survey of the Italian Public," ERSA conference papers ersa06p651, European Regional Science Association.
    6. Fredrik Carlsson & Dinky Daruvala & Henrik Jaldell, 2010. "Value of Statistical Life and Cause of Accident: A Choice Experiment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(6), pages 975-986, June.
    7. Branden B. Johnson & Mathew P. White, 2010. "The Importance of Multiple Performance Criteria for Understanding Trust in Risk Managers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(7), pages 1099-1115, July.
    8. Mahmood Hamid Umar & Jerome Nyameh, 2014. "Examination of Flood Disaster and Government Attitudes Taraba State Experience," Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 56-59.
    9. Karl Dudman & Sara Wit, 2021. "An IPCC that listens: introducing reciprocity to climate change communication," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 1-12, September.
    10. Dennis Guignet & Anna Alberini, 2015. "Can Property Values Capture Changes in Environmental Health Risks? Evidence from a Stated Preference Study in Italy and the United Kingdom," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 501-517, March.
    11. Dennis Guignet & Anna Alberini, 2013. "Can Property Values Capture Changes in Environmental Health Risks? Evidence from a Stated Preference Study in Italy and the UK," Working Papers 2013.67, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. Frederic Vandermoere & Raf Vanderstraeten, 2014. "Back and forward to the future: an explorative study of public responses to urban groundwater contamination," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(5), pages 720-732, May.
    13. Qihui Xie & Yanan Xue, 2022. "The Prediction of Public Risk Perception by Internal Characteristics and External Environment: Machine Learning on Big Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Guignet, Dennis B. & Martinez-Cruz, Adan L., 2018. "The impacts of underground petroleum releases on a homeowner's decision to sell: A difference-in-differences approach," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 11-24.
    15. Olschewski, Roland & Bebi, Peter & Teich, Michaela & Wissen Hayek, Ulrike & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne, 2012. "Avalanche protection by forests — A choice experiment in the Swiss Alps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 108-113.
    16. Dirk Grasmück & Roland W. Scholz, 2005. "Risk Perception of Heavy Metal Soil Contamination by High‐Exposed and Low‐Exposed Inhabitants: The Role of Knowledge and Emotional Concerns," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 611-622, June.
    17. Andersson, Henrik & Hole, Arne Risa & Svensson, Mikael, 2016. "Valuation of small and multiple health risks: A critical analysis of SP data applied to food and water safety," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 41-53.
    18. Gabriele Berg-Beckhoff & Jürgen Breckenkamp & Pia Veldt Larsen & Bernd Kowall, 2014. "General Practitioners’ Knowledge and Concern about Electromagnetic Fields," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-14, December.
    19. Mary Riddel, 2012. "Comparing risk preferences over financial and environmental lotteries," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 135-157, October.
    20. Alberini, Anna & Ščasný, Milan, 2013. "Exploring heterogeneity in the value of a statistical life: Cause of death v. risk perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 143-155.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:13:y:2016:i:4:p:410-:d:67837. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.