Attitudes toward environmental hazards: where do toxic wastes fit?

J Burger, M Martin, K Cooper, M Gochfeld
{"title":"Attitudes toward environmental hazards: where do toxic wastes fit?","authors":"J Burger,&nbsp;M Martin,&nbsp;K Cooper,&nbsp;M Gochfeld","doi":"10.1080/00984109708984015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The public is continually faced with making decisions about the risks associated with environmental hazards, and, along with managers and government officials, must make informed decisions concerning possible regulation, mitigation, and restoration of degraded sites or other environmental threats. We explored the attitudes regarding several environmental hazards of six groups of people: undergraduate science majors, undergraduate nonscience majors, and graduate students in environmental health, in ecological risk assessment, and in nonscience disciplines, as well as nonstudents over 35 yr of age. We had predicted that there would be significant differences in attitudes between science and nonscience majors and as a function of age. Relative concerns could be divided into three discrete classes (in descending order of concern): (1) general ecological problems (cutting tropical forests, polluting groundwater, trash along the coasts, lead in drinking water, and acid rain), (2) radon and nuclear wastes, and finally (3) specific nuclear waste facilities, chromium, fertilizers and pesticides, and electromagnetic waves. For any hazard, attitudes were consistent across groups with regard to ranking the severity of the environmental problem and willingness to expend funds to solve the problems. Attitudes about spending money to develop methods to evaluate risk fell in the middle level of concern. There were no major differences among classes of college-age students, or between them and older nonstudents.</p>","PeriodicalId":17524,"journal":{"name":"Journal of toxicology and environmental health","volume":"51 2","pages":"109-21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00984109708984015","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of toxicology and environmental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00984109708984015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The public is continually faced with making decisions about the risks associated with environmental hazards, and, along with managers and government officials, must make informed decisions concerning possible regulation, mitigation, and restoration of degraded sites or other environmental threats. We explored the attitudes regarding several environmental hazards of six groups of people: undergraduate science majors, undergraduate nonscience majors, and graduate students in environmental health, in ecological risk assessment, and in nonscience disciplines, as well as nonstudents over 35 yr of age. We had predicted that there would be significant differences in attitudes between science and nonscience majors and as a function of age. Relative concerns could be divided into three discrete classes (in descending order of concern): (1) general ecological problems (cutting tropical forests, polluting groundwater, trash along the coasts, lead in drinking water, and acid rain), (2) radon and nuclear wastes, and finally (3) specific nuclear waste facilities, chromium, fertilizers and pesticides, and electromagnetic waves. For any hazard, attitudes were consistent across groups with regard to ranking the severity of the environmental problem and willingness to expend funds to solve the problems. Attitudes about spending money to develop methods to evaluate risk fell in the middle level of concern. There were no major differences among classes of college-age students, or between them and older nonstudents.

对待环境危害的态度:有毒废物应该放在哪里?
公众不断面临着对与环境危害有关的风险作出决定的问题,并且必须与管理人员和政府官员一道,就可能的监管、缓解和恢复退化的地点或其他环境威胁作出知情决定。我们探讨了六组人群对几种环境危害的态度:理科生、非理科生、环境健康、生态风险评估和非理科生,以及年龄在35岁以上的非学生。我们曾预测,理科生和非理科生在态度上存在显著差异,而且这是年龄的函数。相对关注的问题可以分为三个离散的类别(按关注程度递减):(1)一般生态问题(砍伐热带森林、污染地下水、沿海垃圾、饮用水中的铅和酸雨),(2)氡和核废料,最后(3)特定核废料设施、铬、化肥和农药以及电磁波。对于任何危害,在对环境问题的严重程度排序和花费资金解决问题的意愿方面,各群体的态度是一致的。对花钱开发评估风险的方法的态度下降到中等关注水平。在大学年龄段的学生之间,或者在他们和年龄较大的非学生之间,没有明显的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信