IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v22y2002i4p725-738.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender and Race in Beliefs about Outdoor Air Pollution

Author

Listed:
  • Branden B. Johnson

Abstract

Universal need for, or reactions to, risk communications should not be assumed; potential differences across demographic groups in environmental risk beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors could affect risk levels or opportunities for risk reduction. This article reports relevant findings from a survey experiment involving 1,100 potential jurors in Philadelphia concerning public responses to outdoor air pollution and air quality information. Flynn et al. (1994) and Finucane et al. (2000) found significant differences in risk ratings for multiple hazards, and in generic risk beliefs, between white men (or a subset) and all others (white women, nonwhite men, and nonwhite women). This study examined whether white men had significantly different responses to air pollution and air pollution information. An opportunity sample of volunteers from those awaiting potential jury duty in city courts (matching census estimates for white versus nonwhite proportions, but more female than the city's adult population and more likely to have children) filled out questionnaires distributed quasi‐randomly. On most measures there were no statistically significant differences among white men (N = 192), white women (N = 269), nonwhite men (N = 165), and nonwhite women (N = 272). Nonwhites overall (particularly women) reported more concern about and sensitivity to air pollution than whites, and were more concerned by (even overly sensitive to) air pollution information provided as part of the experiment. Nonwhites also were more likely (within‐gender comparisons) to report being active outdoors for at least four hours a day, a measure of potential exposure to air pollution, and to report intentions to reduce such outdoor activity after reading air pollution information. Differences between men and women were less frequent than between whites and nonwhites; the most distinctive group was nonwhite women, followed by white men. Flynn et al. (1994) and Finucane et al. (2000) found a far larger proportion of significant differences, with white men as most distinctive, probably due to use of different measures, study design, and population samples. However, all three studies broadly confirm the existence of gender and race interactions in risk beliefs and attitudes (particularly for white men and nonwhite women) that deserve more attention from researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Branden B. Johnson, 2002. "Gender and Race in Beliefs about Outdoor Air Pollution," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 725-738, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:22:y:2002:i:4:p:725-738
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.00064
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.00064
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0272-4332.00064?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caron Chess & Kandice L. Salomone & Billie Jo Hance & Alex Saville, 1995. "Results of a National Symposium on Risk Communication: Next Steps for Government Agencies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 115-125, April.
    2. Joanna Burger & Warren L. Stephens & C. Shane Boring & Michelle Kuklinski & J. Whitfield Gibbons & Michael Gochfeld, 1999. "Factors in Exposure Assessment: Ethnic and Socioeconomic Differences in Fishing and Consumption of Fish Caught along the Savannah River," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 427-438, June.
    3. Elaine Vaughan, 1995. "The Significance of Socioeconomic and Ethnic Diversity for the Risk Communication Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 169-180, April.
    4. Michael R. Greenberg & Dona F. Schneider, 1995. "Gender Differences in Risk Perception: Effects Differ in Stressed vs. Non‐Stressed Environments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 503-511, August.
    5. James Flynn & Paul Slovic & C. K. Mertz, 1994. "Gender, Race, and Perception of Environmental Health Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 1101-1108, December.
    6. Caron Chess & Kandice L. Salomone & Billie Jo Hance, 1995. "Improving Risk Communication in Government: Research Priorities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 127-135, 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. Gautam, Narayan Prasad & Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Raut, Nirmal Kumar & Tigabu, Mulualem & Raut, Nirjala & Rashid, Muhammad Haroon U. & Ma, Xiangqing & Wu, Pengfei, 2020. "Do earthquakes change the timber and firewood use pattern of the forest dependent households? Evidence from rural hills in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    2. Terre A. Satterfield & C. K. Mertz & Paul Slovic, 2004. "Discrimination, Vulnerability, and Justice in the Face of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 115-129, February.
    3. Denise Howel & Suzanne Moffatt & Helen Prince & Judith Bush & Christine E Dunn, 2002. "Urban Air Quality in North‐East England: Exploring the Influences on Local Views and Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 121-130, February.
    4. Nancy A. Connelly & Barbara A. Knuth, 1998. "Evaluating Risk Communication: Examining Target Audience Perceptions About Four Presentation Formats for Fish Consumption Health Advisory Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 649-659, October.
    5. Alexandra Savelkaeva & Valentina Poliakova & Konstantin Fursov, 2015. "Structure of Social Attitudes to Science and Technology: National and Individual Determinants," HSE Working papers WP BRP 52/STI/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    6. Malcolm P. Cutchin & Kathryn Remmes Martin & Steven V. Owen & James S. Goodwin, 2008. "Concern About Petrochemical Health Risk Before and After a Refinery Explosion," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(3), pages 589-601, June.
    7. Minerva Catalán‐Vázquez & Astrid Schilmann & Horacio Riojas‐Rodríguez, 2010. "Perceived Health Risks of Manganese in the Molango Mining District, Mexico," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 619-634, April.
    8. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, 2007. "Does Concern‐Driven Risk Management Provide a Viable Alternative to QRA?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 27-43, February.
    9. Åsa Boholm, 2019. "Risk Communication as Government Agency Organizational Practice," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1695-1707, August.
    10. Branden B. Johnson, 2011. "Acculturation, Ethnicity, and Air Pollution Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(6), pages 984-999, June.
    11. Houghton, J.R. & Rowe, G. & Frewer, L.J. & Van Kleef, E. & Chryssochoidis, G. & Kehagia, O. & Korzen-Bohr, S. & Lassen, J. & Pfenning, U. & Strada, A., 2008. "The quality of food risk management in Europe: Perspectives and priorities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 13-26, February.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Chuanshen Qin & Jianhua Xu & Gabrielle Wong‐Parodi & Lan Xue, 2020. "Change in Public Concern and Responsive Behaviors Toward Air Pollution Under the Dome," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 1983-2001, October.
    15. Lee, You-Kyung, 2020. "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea: From the users’ perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    16. Ronald L. Schumann & Kevin D. Ash & Gregg C. Bowser, 2018. "Tornado Warning Perception and Response: Integrating the Roles of Visual Design, Demographics, and Hazard Experience," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 311-332, February.
    17. Michael K. Lindell & Seong Nam Hwang, 2008. "Households' Perceived Personal Risk and Responses in a Multihazard Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 539-556, April.
    18. Abbas El‐Zein & Rola Nasrallah & Iman Nuwayhid & Lea Kai & Jihad Makhoul, 2006. "Why Do Neighbors Have Different Environmental Priorities? Analysis of Environmental Risk Perception in a Beirut Neighborhood," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 423-435, April.
    19. John R. Becker–Blease & Jeffrey E. Sohl, 2011. "The Effect of Gender Diversity on Angel Group Investment," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 35(4), pages 709-733, July.
    20. Wouter Poortinga & Karin Bronstering & Simon Lannon, 2011. "Awareness and Perceptions of the Risks of Exposure to Indoor Radon: A Population‐Based Approach to Evaluate a Radon Awareness and Testing Campaign in England and Wales," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(11), pages 1800-1812, November.

    More about this item

    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:wly:riskan:v:22:y:2002:i:4:p:725-738. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.