scholarly journals Public risk perceptions associated with Asian carp introduction and corresponding response actions

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Kahler ◽  
Rain Liu ◽  
Tammy Newcomb ◽  
Seth Herbst ◽  
Meredith Gore
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Asian Carp ◽  
Public Risk

scholarly journals Modeling the Influence of Public Risk Perceptions on the Adoption of Green Stormwater Infrastructure: An Application of Bayesian Belief Networks Versus Logistic Regressions on a Statewide Survey of Households in Vermont

Water ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 2793
Author(s):  
Qing Ren ◽  
Asim Zia ◽  
Donna M. Rizzo ◽  
Nancy Mathews
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Green Infrastructure ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Bayesian Belief Networks ◽  
Point Sources ◽  
Supervised Machine Learning ◽  
Belief Networks ◽  
Rain Gardens ◽  
Environmental Behaviors ◽  
Public Risk

There is growing environmental psychology and behavior literature with mixed empirical evidence about the influence of public risk perceptions on the adoption of environmentally friendly “green behaviors”. Adoption of stormwater green infrastructure on residential properties, while costlier in the short term compared to conventional greywater infrastructure, plays an important role in the reduction of nutrient loading from non-point sources into freshwater rivers and lakes. In this study, we use Bayesian Belief Networks (BBNs) to analyze a 2015 survey dataset (sample size = 472 respondents) about the adoption of green infrastructure (GSI) in Vermont’s residential areas, most of which are located in either the Lake Champlain Basin or Connecticut River Basin. Eight categories of GSI were investigated: roof diversion, permeable pavement, infiltration trenches, green roofs, rain gardens, constructed wetlands, tree boxes, and others. Using both unsupervised and supervised machine learning algorithms, we used Bayesian Belief Networks to quantify the influence of public risk perceptions on GSI adoption while accounting for a range of demographic and spatial variables. We also compare the effectiveness of the Bayesian Belief Network approach and logistic regression in predicting the pro-environmental behaviors (adoption of GSI). The results show that influencing factors for current adoption differ by the type of GSI. Increased perception of risk from stormwater issues is associated with the adoption of rain gardens and infiltration trenches. Runoff issues are more likely to be considered the governments’ (town, state, and federal agencies) responsibility, whereas lawn erosion is more likely to be considered the residents’ responsibility. When using the same set of variables to predict pro-environmental behaviors (adoption of GSI), the BBN approach produces more accurate predictions compared to logistic regression. The results provide insights for further research on how to encourage residents to take measures for mitigating stormwater issues and stormwater management.

Commentary on hormesis and public risk communication: is there a basis for public discussions?

2003 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Flynn ◽  
Donald MacGregor
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Threshold Model ◽  
Exposure Model ◽  
Social Good ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Daunting Task ◽  
Public Risk ◽  
The Impact

Research on radiation exposure is now focusing on microbiology and the impact of low dose exposures on cells and cell components. Eventually, this research may provide evidence to support changes in the models used to regulate human and environmental exposures. Currently, three models using older research results are subjects of interest and comparison. The linear no threshold model, the most restrictive on behalf of public health values, dominates regulatory decision making. Alternative models (i.e., the threshold model and the hormesis model) could reduce costs of radiation management, depending upon new research results and public acceptance. Enacting a new public exposure model is a daunting task for risk communication given existing public risk perceptions and the established public decision-making processes. Each of the three prominent models must answer the question, ‘what social good requires the use of this model in contrast to the others?’

scholarly journals Estimation of Individual Probabilities of COVID-19 Infection, Hospitalization, and Death From A County-level Contact of Unknown infection Status

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajiv Bhatia ◽  
Jeffrey Klausner
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
County Level ◽  
Infection Status ◽  
Current Case ◽  
Median Estimate ◽  
Public Data ◽  
Public Risk ◽  
Asymptomatic Infections ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Reported Data

AbstractObjectiveOur objective is to demonstrate a method to estimate the probability of a laboratory confirmed COVID19 infection, hospitalization, and death arising from a contact with an individual of unknown infection status.MethodsWe calculate the probability of a confirmed infection, hospitalization, and death resulting from a county-level person-contact using available data on current case incidence, secondary attack rates, infectious periods, asymptomatic infections, and ratios of confirmed infections to hospitalizations and fatalities.ResultsAmong US counties with populations greater than 500,000 people, during the week ending June 13,2020, the median estimate of the county level probability of a confirmed infection is 1 infection in 40,500 person contacts (Range: 10,100 to 586,000). For a 50 to 64 year-old individual, the median estimate of the county level probability of a hospitalization is 1 in 709,000 person contacts (Range: 177,000 to 10,200,000) and the median estimate of the county level probability of a fatality is 1 in 6,670,000 person contacts (Range 1,680,000 to 97,600.000).Conclusions and RelevanceEstimates of the individual probabilities of COVID19 infection, hospitalization and death vary widely but may not align with public risk perceptions. Systematically collected and publicly reported data on infection incidence by, for example, the setting of exposure, type of residence and occupation would allow more precise estimates of probabilities than possible with currently available public data. Calculation of secondary attack rates by setting and better measures of the prevalence of seropositivity would further improve those estimates.

Public Risk Perceptions and the Preferences of Policy Makers

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Vogel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Historical Overview ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Health Safety ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Public Risk ◽  
Public Concerns

This chapter explores changes in public opinion regarding the transatlantic politics of risk regulation, as well as the preferences of influential policy makers. Both separately and by their interaction with one another, they have had a critical impact on shaping the divergence in transatlantic regulatory stringency. The chapter presents a broad historical overview of changes in public demands for more stringent risk regulations and the willingness of policy makers to address them. During the second half of the 1980s, the extent and intensity of public concerns about a wide range of health, safety, and environmental risks increased substantially on both sides of the Atlantic. These concerns played a role in a major expansion of consumer and environmental regulation in both the EU and the United States.

scholarly journals Strife of Brian: Science and Reflexive Reason as a Public Project. An interview with Brian Wynne

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Antonsen ◽  
Rita Elmkvist Nilsen
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Public Project ◽  
Public Risk ◽  
Strong Programme ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Political Turn

<p>We met Brian Wynne in late April 2013. The place was Hell, Norway, which is nicer than it sounds, especially if you are attending the first Nordic STS Conference. We had recently established NJSTS, and when we heard that Brian Wynne was giving a keynote lecture at the conference, we took the opportunity to interview a pioneer in the field about the so-called political turn in STS. The topics of Wynne`s work ranges<br />from technology and risk assessment, public risk perceptions, and public understanding of science, focusing on the relations between expert and lay knowledge and policy decision-making. He has promoted STS and its democratizing potential since the very beginning, and has never been known to shy away from the more controversial aspects of public understanding and engagement in science. Neither did he in this interview: It seems despite his strifes, he is still going with a strong programme.</p><p><br />Professor Wynne has addended the interview with some clarifications and references.</p>

scholarly journals Epidemic Risk Perceptions in Italy and Sweden Driven by Authority Responses to COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Raffetti ◽  
Elena Mondino ◽  
Giuliano Di Baldassarre
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Regional Differences ◽  
Excess Mortality ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Population Impact ◽  
Public Risk ◽  
Epidemic Risk

Abstract Understanding public risk perception is an essential step to develop effective measures reducing the spread of disease outbreaks. Here we compare epidemic risk perceptions during two different periods of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we analyzed the results of two nationwide surveys carried out in both countries in two periods characterized by different infection rates: August (N = 4,154) and November 2020 (N = 4,168). Seven domains of epidemic risk perception were considered: likelihood along with (individual and population) impact, preparedness, and knowledge. The role of the context and period was explored in stratified and formal interaction analyses. In both countries, we found an intensification in epidemic risk perception from August to November 2020. Being male, older and having a higher relative income were associated with a lower perception of the likelihood of epidemics, while excess mortality was marginally related to higher odds. Compared to Sweden, Italy had a higher increase in perception of likelihood and impact, and a concurrent decrease in preparedness and knowledge. The different authority response to the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a different change over time in risk perception. Regional differences in terms of excess mortality only marginally explained differences in risk perception.

scholarly journals Risk Perceptions during COVID-19 Pandemic: Applying Knowledge on Public Compliance to Protective Measures during SARS to Understand Risk Communication

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. p1
Author(s):  
Xingrui Chen
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Economic Loss ◽  
Pharmaceutical Treatment ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Confidence Levels ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
Public Risk

The outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020 has caused significant environmental and economic loss across the globe. The government’s promotion of non-pharmaceutical treatment such as social distancing, hand washing, and mask-wearing can be equally important in disease control compared to the conventional use of pharmaceutical treatment. Risk perception is often used as an important mechanism to understand an individual's compliance with these protective measures. The present article examines the application of previous knowledge about public risk perception, decision making, and behavioral change to the current global pandemic and evaluates the most effective way of governmental messaging. The article analyzes empirical research conducted during COVID-19 across the globe where risk perception is found to be a strong determinant of people’s adoption of public health behavior. Demographic factors can significantly alter people’s understanding of risk due to the variation of individualistic view and prosociality of each nation. Cognitive biases can also affect people’s efficacy beliefs and confidence levels in government which can shape their risk perception to a great extent as well. Combining studies on both SARS and COVID-19, we are able to employ past knowledge to draw conclusions on risk communication and governmental promotion of protective measures during the current global pandemic.

Public risk perceptions, understandings and responses to climate change

2014 ◽  
pp. 43-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph P. Reser ◽  
Graham L. Bradley ◽  
Michelle C. Ellul
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Public Risk
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document