IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Diffusion of US army chemical weapons disposal technologies: public perception of technology attributes

Listed author(s):
  • Bryan Williams
  • Hoi Suen
  • Sarah Rzasa
  • Tanya Heikkila
  • Maria Pennock-Roman
Registered author(s):

    This study was conducted to identify factors that influence individuals' acceptance of environmental management technologies for cleaning up hazardous materials. The study sample consisted of approximately 2600 residents living within emergency response zones surrounding eight US Army's Chemical Weapons Stockpile sites. The findings suggest that residents perceive clear differences between the desirable characteristics of the two technologies: incineration and neutralization. In a relative comparison, the majority of positive technological attributes were associated with incineration. Positive perceptions toward incineration were associated with individuals who trust the Army, who perceive that the media have made them more trusting of weapons disposal activities, who are ready to participate, and who are male. Unlike incineration, there was insufficient evidence that individual factors influence variations in perceptions toward neutralization. No community factor was related to perceptions toward either incineration or neutralization.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Journal of Environmental Planning and Management.

    Volume (Year): 46 (2003)
    Issue (Month): 4 ()
    Pages: 499-522

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:46:y:2003:i:4:p:499-522
    DOI: 10.1080/0964056032000133134
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:46:y:2003:i:4:p:499-522. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.