IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v23y2003i4p669-684.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perception of Environmental Hazards in Hong Kong Chinese

Author

Listed:
  • Julian Chuk‐ling Lai
  • Julia Tao

Abstract

A public sample of Hong Kong Chinese (N= 167) rated the levels of threat of 25 environmental hazards and gave quantitative judgments to six risk characteristics for each hazard. It was found that women, older participants, and less educated individuals found the hazards to be more threatening to the environment than did men, younger participants, and more educated individuals, respectively. A new spatial model emerged from a principal component analysis carried out on responses to six risk characteristics. Instead of replicating the well‐documented factors of unknown risk versus dread risk, we found a structure defined by a known and dread risk factor and a controllable risk factor. Findings were discussed in light of potential influences of the Confucian heritage on the perception of risks among Hong Kong Chinese.

Suggested Citation

  • Julian Chuk‐ling Lai & Julia Tao, 2003. "Perception of Environmental Hazards in Hong Kong Chinese," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 669-684, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:4:p:669-684
    DOI: 10.1111/1539-6924.00346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1539-6924.00346
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1539-6924.00346?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. George W. Hinman & Eugene A. Rosa & Randall R. Kleinhesselink & Thomas C. Lowinger, 1993. "Perceptions of Nuclear and Other Risks in Japan and the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 449-455, August.
    2. Charles F. Keown, 1989. "Risk Perceptions of Hong Kongese vs. Americans," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 401-405, September.
    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. Kathleen L. Purvis‐Roberts & Cynthia A. Werner & Irene Frank, 2007. "Perceived Risks from Radiation and Nuclear Testing Near Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan: A Comparison Between Physicians, Scientists, and the Public," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 291-302, April.
    2. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Luis A. Cifuentes, 2003. "Risk Perception in a Developing Country: The Case of Chile," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1271-1285, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Zhang Jianguang, 1994. "Environmental Hazards in the Chinese Public's Eyes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(2), pages 163-167, April.
    5. Naomi Aoki, 2018. "Who Would Be Willing to Accept Disaster Debris in Their Backyard? Investigating the Determinants of Public Attitudes in Post‐Fukushima Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 535-547, March.
    6. M. V. Ramana, 2018. "Technical and social problems of nuclear waste," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(4), July.
    7. Mahmaod Alrawad & Abdalwali Lutfi & Mohammed Amin Almaiah & Adi Alsyouf & Hussin Mostafa Arafa & Yasser Soliman & Ibrahim A. Elshaer, 2023. "A Novel Framework of Public Risk Assessment Using an Integrated Approach Based on AHP and Psychometric Paradigm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-17, June.
    8. Evgenidis, Anastasios & Hamano, Masashige & Vermeulen, Wessel N., 2021. "Economic consequences of follow-up disasters: Lessons from the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    9. Craig W. Trumbo & Katherine A. McComas, 2003. "The Function of Credibility in Information Processing for Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 343-353, April.
    10. Lonzozou Kpanake & Bruno Chauvin & Etienne Mullet, 2008. "Societal Risk Perception Among African Villagers Without Access to the Media," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 193-202, February.
    11. Ewa Lechowska, 2022. "Approaches in research on flood risk perception and their importance in flood risk management: a review," 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. 111(3), pages 2343-2378, April.
    12. Michael R. Greenberg, 2009. "NIMBY, CLAMP, and the Location of New Nuclear‐Related Facilities: U.S. National and 11 Site‐Specific Surveys," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9), pages 1242-1254, September.
    13. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Luis Abdón Cifuentes & Virna Vaneza Gutiérrez, 2008. "Participant-focused analysis: explanatory power of the classic psychometric paradigm in risk perception," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 735-753, September.
    14. Yi‐Wen Kung & Sue‐Huei Chen, 2012. "Perception of Earthquake Risk in Taiwan: Effects of Gender and Past Earthquake Experience," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1535-1546, September.
    15. Robert N. Bontempo & William P. Bottom & Elke U. Weber, 1997. "Cross‐Cultural Differences in Risk Perception: A Model‐Based Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(4), pages 479-488, August.
    16. Mahmaod Alrawad & Abdalwali Lutfi & Sundus Alyatama & Ibrahim A. Elshaer & Mohammed Amin Almaiah, 2022. "Perception of Occupational and Environmental Risks and Hazards among Mineworkers: A Psychometric Paradigm Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-12, March.
    17. Markus R. Schmidt & Wei Wei, 2006. "Loss of Agro‐Biodiversity, Uncertainty, and Perceived Control: A Comparative Risk Perception Study in Austria and China," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 455-470, April.
    18. Craig W. Trumbo, 1996. "Examining Psychometrics and Polarization in a Single‐Risk Case Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 429-438, June.
    19. Elaine Gierlach & Bradley E. Belsher & Larry E. Beutler, 2010. "Cross‐Cultural Differences in Risk Perceptions of Disasters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(10), pages 1539-1549, October.
    20. Jang, Yeonju & Park, Eunil, 2020. "Social acceptance of nuclear power plants in Korea: The role of public perceptions following the Fukushima accident," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).

    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:23:y:2003:i:4:p:669-684. 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.