IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p3716-d776515.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Dependencies and the Relationship between Subjective Perception and Objective Environmental Risks in Lithuania

Author

Listed:
  • Aistė Balžekienė

    (Civil Society and Sustainability Research Group, Faculty of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, Kaunas University of Technology, 44249 Kaunas, Lithuania)

  • Audronė Telešienė

    (Civil Society and Sustainability Research Group, Faculty of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, Kaunas University of Technology, 44249 Kaunas, Lithuania)

  • Vaidas Morkevičius

    (Civil Society and Sustainability Research Group, Faculty of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, Kaunas University of Technology, 44249 Kaunas, Lithuania)

Abstract

The effects of objective environmental indicators on subjective risk perceptions are under-researched and bring new frontiers to environmental risk perception research. The aim of this article is to analyze the spatial distribution of environmental risks in Lithuania, to identify social-psychological factors that determine variances of risk perception, and to contrast perception data with objective environmental data. This article is based on the representative national survey of 2007 respondents conducted from September to October of 2020 in Lithuania, and on the objective indicators of flood risk, air quality, water pollution, and forest fires. Analytical methods used in this article include spatial autocorrelation as well as spatial and linear regressions. Spatial analysis of objective environmental risk indicators reveal that the five biggest cities in Lithuania experience higher levels of environmental risks. Flood risk perceptions are spatially related to objective flood risks, and the relation is not significant for other types of risks. Place of residence, gender, education, and income are significant factors explaining risk perceptions. Place of residence is negatively moderating the effect of objective environmental risks on perceptions, as people in the biggest cities underestimate risks, especially from air pollution.

Suggested Citation

  • Aistė Balžekienė & Audronė Telešienė & Vaidas Morkevičius, 2022. "Spatial Dependencies and the Relationship between Subjective Perception and Objective Environmental Risks in Lithuania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3716-:d:776515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3716/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3716/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Samuel D. Brody & B. Mitchell Peck & Wesley E. Highfield, 2004. "Examining Localized Patterns of Air Quality Perception in Texas: A Spatial and Statistical Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1561-1574, December.
    2. Lennart Sjöberg, 2000. "Factors in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Sílvia Luís & Luísa Pinho & Maria Luísa Lima & Catarina Roseta-Palma & Filomena Cardoso Martins & António Betâmio de Almeida, 2016. "Is it all about awareness? The normalization of coastal risk," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(6), pages 810-826, June.
    4. Wanyun Shao & Maaz Gardezi & Siyuan Xian, 2018. "Examining the Effects of Objective Hurricane Risks and Community Resilience on Risk Perceptions of Hurricanes at the County Level in the U.S. Gulf Coast: An Innovative Approach," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 108(5), pages 1389-1405, September.
    5. Carmen Keller & Ann Bostrom & Margot Kuttschreuter & Lucia Savadori & Alexa Spence & Mathew White, 2012. "Bringing appraisal theory to environmental risk perception: a review of conceptual approaches of the past 40 years and suggestions for future research," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 237-256, March.
    6. Tien Ming Lee & Ezra M. Markowitz & Peter D. Howe & Chia-Ying Ko & Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2015. "Predictors of public climate change awareness and risk perception around the world," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(11), pages 1014-1020, November.
    7. Breakwell,Glynis M., 2014. "The Psychology of Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107602700.
    8. Sonam Futi Sherpa & Milan Shrestha & Hallie Eakin & Christopher G. Boone, 2019. "Cryospheric hazards and risk perceptions in the Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National Park and Buffer Zone, Nepal," 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. 96(2), pages 607-626, March.
    9. Fox, John, 2003. "Effect Displays in R for Generalised Linear Models," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 8(i15).
    10. Breakwell,Glynis M., 2014. "The Psychology of Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107017016.
    11. Rianne van Duinen & Tatiana Filatova & Peter Geurts & Anne van der Veen, 2015. "Empirical Analysis of Farmers' Drought Risk Perception: Objective Factors, Personal Circumstances, and Social Influence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 741-755, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Abinash Bhattachan & Matthew D. Jurjonas & Priscilla R. Morris & Paul J. Taillie & Lindsey S. Smart & Ryan E. Emanuel & Erin L. Seekamp, 2019. "Linking residential saltwater intrusion risk perceptions to physical exposure of climate change impacts in rural coastal communities of North Carolina," 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(3), pages 1277-1295, July.
    2. Domingues, Rita & Costas, Susana & Jesus, Saul & Ferreira, Óscar, 2017. "SENSE OF PLACE, RISK PERCEPTIONS AND PREPAREDNESS OF A COASTAL POPULATION AT RISK (Faro Beach, Portugal): A qualitative content analysis," Journal of Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, Cinturs - Research Centre for Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, University of Algarve, vol. 5(3), pages 163-175.
    3. Domingues, Rita & Costas, Susana & Neves Jesus, Saul & Ferreira, Óscar, 2019. "Assessing stakeholders’ risk perceptions in a vulnerable coastal tourism destination (Faro beach, Southern Portugal)," Journal of Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, Cinturs - Research Centre for Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, University of Algarve, vol. 7(1), pages 22-38.
    4. Angelo Panno & Annalisa Theodorou & Giuseppe Alessio Carbone & Evelina De Longis & Chiara Massullo & Gianluca Cepale & Giuseppe Carrus & Claudio Imperatori & Giovanni Sanesi, 2021. "Go Greener, Less Risk: Access to Nature Is Associated with Lower Risk Taking in Different Domains during the COVID-19 Lockdown," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, September.
    5. Rusi Jaspal, 2022. "Chemsex, Identity and Sexual Health among Gay and Bisexual Men," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-16, September.
    6. Han Jiang & Albert A. Cannella & Jie Jiao, 2018. "Does Desperation Breed Deceiver? A Behavioral Model of New Venture Opportunism," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 42(5), pages 769-796, September.
    7. Dominic Way & Hortense Blazsin & Ragnar Löfstedt & Frederic Bouder, 2017. "Pharmaceutical Benefit–Risk Communication Tools: A Review of the Literature," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 15-36, January.
    8. Anne-Marie Lebrun & Roxane Corbel & Patrick Bouchet, 2022. "Impacts of Covid-19 on travel intention for summer 2020: a trend in proximity tourism mediated by an attitude towards Covid-19," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 16(3), pages 469-501, September.
    9. Andrea Guati-Rojo & Christina Demski & Wouter Poortinga & Agustin Valera-Medina, 2021. "Public Attitudes and Concerns about Ammonia as an Energy Vector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-14, November.
    10. Kala Saravanamuthu, 2018. "How risk information and stakeholder‐participation affect the sustainability of collaborative decisions: A case study on how the sustainability of stakeholder decisions is affected by different levels," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 1067-1078, November.
    11. Fredy S. Monge-Rodríguez & He Jiang & Liwei Zhang & Andy Alvarado-Yepez & Anahí Cardona-Rivero & Enma Huaman-Chulluncuy & Analy Torres-Mejía, 2021. "Psychological Factors Affecting Risk Perception of COVID-19: Evidence from Peru and China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-16, June.
    12. Yu Zhang & John A. Rupp & John D. Graham, 2021. "Contrasting Public and Scientific Assessments of Fracking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, June.
    13. Joseph P. Reser & Graham L. Bradley, 2020. "The nature, significance, and influence of perceived personal experience of climate change," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(5), September.
    14. Zeynep Altinay & Eric Rittmeyer & Lauren L. Morris & Margaret A. Reams, 2021. "Public risk salience of sea level rise in Louisiana, United States," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(4), pages 523-536, December.
    15. John D. Graham & John A. Rupp & Olga Schenk, 2015. "Unconventional Gas Development in the USA: Exploring the Risk Perception Issues," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1770-1788, October.
    16. Andrzej Robert Skrzypczak & Emil Andrzej Karpiński & Natalia Maja Józefacka & Robert Podstawski, 2022. "Impact of Personal Experience of COVID-19 Disease on Recreational Anglers’ Attitudes and Behaviors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-17, December.
    17. Max Boholm, 2019. "Risk and Quantification: A Linguistic Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(6), pages 1243-1261, June.
    18. Michael Siegrist & Joseph Árvai, 2020. "Risk Perception: Reflections on 40 Years of Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2191-2206, November.
    19. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Andrew Dugan, 2022. "On the differential correlates of climate change concerns and severe weather concerns: evidence from the World Risk Poll," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-24, April.
    20. Craig W. Trumbo & Lori Peek & Michelle A. Meyer & Holly L. Marlatt & Eve Gruntfest & Brian D. McNoldy & Wayne H. Schubert, 2016. "A Cognitive‐Affective Scale for Hurricane Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(12), pages 2233-2246, December.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3716-:d:776515. 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.