nach oben

Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management

Erschienen in:

20.05.2023 | SPECIAL FEATURE: ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The impact of cognitive aversion toward mercury on public attitude toward the construction of mercury wastes landfill site

verfasst von: Fumitake Takahashi

Erschienen in: Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management | Ausgabe 5/2023

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Minamata convention on mercury requests mercury wastes landfilling in environmentally safe manners. Owing to great difficulties to form public acceptance of landfill site construction, this study focused on emotional appraisal to mercury. The author quantitatively evaluated cognitive aversions toward mercury and other harmful/hazard-like objects like dioxin using two types of pairwise comparison methods. The results of both methods showed good agreement. Mercury received the second strongest aversion, following radioactive wastes. Gender and age gave no significant impact on mercury aversion at 5% significance level. When perceived knowledge of mercury was neutral or positive, higher awareness resulted in stronger mercury aversion. In contrast, mercury aversion was almost constant regardless of negative level of the awareness. When the attitude toward construction of mercury waste landfill site was mitigated from rejection to neutral, mercury aversion decreased. On the other hand, mercury aversion increased when the attitude was shifted from neutral to acceptance. Rejection attitude might be affected by mercury aversion. In contrast, acceptance attitude was formed by rational consideration of mercury landfill necessity, not weak aversion. To design a supporting process for public acceptance formation, stronger mercury aversion perceived by both acceptance and rejection attitude persons should be concerned.

Vorheriger Artikel Mercury in coal from south eastern coalfield and mercury partitioning at sub-critical coal-fired power plant

Nächster Artikel 100-year simulation of mercury emissions from landfilled stabilized mercury waste

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

UN Environment (2019) Global mercury assessment 2018, UN Environment Programme, Chemicals andHealth Branch Geneva, Switzerland, ISBN: 978-92-807-3744-8.

Morel FMM, Kraepiel AML, Amyot M (1998) The chemical cycle and bioaccumulation of mercury. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 29:543–566CrossRef

Lee KJ, Lee TG (2012) A review of international trends in mercury management and available options for permanent or long-term mercury storage. J Hazard Mater 241:1–13CrossRef

Alhakami AS, Slovic P (1994) A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk Anal 14(6):1085–1096CrossRef

Barnett J, Cooper H, Senior V (2007) Belief in public efficacy, trust, and attitudes toward modern genetic science. Risk Anal 27(4):921–933CrossRef

Costa-Font J, Rudisill C, Mossialos E (2008) Attitudes as an expression of knowledge and “political anchoring”: the case of nuclear power in the United Kingdom. Risk Anal 28(5):1273–1287CrossRef

Purvis-Roberts KL, Werner CA, Frank I (2007) Perceived risks from radiation and nuclear testing near Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan: a comparison between physicians, scientists, and the public. Risk Anal 27(2):291–302CrossRef

Schulte I, Hart D, Van der Vorst R (2004) Issues affecting the acceptance of hydrogen fuel. Int J Hydrogen Energ 29(7):677–685CrossRef

Slovic P, Flynn JH, Layman M (1991) Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. Science 254(5038):1603–1607CrossRef

10.

Gupta N, Fischer ARH, Frewer LJ (2012) Socio-psychological determinants of public acceptance of technologies: a review. Public Underst Sci 21(7):782–789CrossRef

11.

Hirono Y (2017) A historical review of mercury risk perception focusing on organic mercury poisoning in Japan and Minamata disease. Arch Philos History Sci. 19:1–38 (Univ. of Tokyo, In Japanese)

12.

Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236(4799):280–285CrossRef

13.

Kleinhesselink RR, Rosa EA (1991) Cognitive representation of risk perceptions: a comparison of Japan and the United States. J Cross Cult Psychol 22(1):11–28CrossRef

14.

Kinoshita T (2002) An international comparative survey on risk perception structure. J Jpn Soc Saf Eng 41(6):356–363 (In Japanese)

15.

Niiyama Y, Kito Y, Hosono H, Kawamura R, Kudo H, Kiyohara A (2011) The structural models of public risk perception of typical food-related hazards: an analysis of the structural complexity of incorporated factors by SEM. Jpn J Risk Anal 21(4):295–306 (In Japanese)

16.

Thurstone LL (1927) A law of comparative judgement. Psychol Rev 24:273–286CrossRef

17.

Bockenholt U (2006) Thurstonian-based analyses: past, present, and future utilities. Psychometrika 71(4):615–629MathSciNetMATHCrossRef

18.

Krabbe PFM (2008) Thurstone scaling as a measurement method to quantify subjective health outcomes. Med Care 46(4):357–365CrossRef

19.

Kwan YK, Chiu LL, Kwan WCIP (2002) Perceived crime seriousness: consensus and disparity. J Crim Justice 30:623–632CrossRef

20.

Amookht S, Kandi SG, Mahdavian M (2019) Quantification of perceptual coarseness of metallic coatings containing aluminum flakes using texture analysis and visual assessment methods. Prog Org Coat 137:105375CrossRef

21.

Day EA, Berns RS, Taplin LA, Imai FH (2004) A psychophysical experiment evaluating the color and spatial image quality of several multispectral image capture techniques. J Imaging Sci Techn 48(2):93–104CrossRef

22.

Takahashi F (2020) Cognitive aversion of mercury scaled by pairwise comparison method with Thurstone’s law of comparative judgement. Global Environ Res 24(1):45–52

23.

Frewer L, Lassen J, Kettlitz B, Scholderer J, Beekman V, Berdal KG (2004) Societal aspects of genetically modified foods. Food Chem Toxicol 42(7):1181–1193CrossRef

24.

Bawa AS, Anilakumar KR (2013) Genetically modified foods: safety, risks and public concerns-a review. J Food Sci Technol 50(6):1035–1046CrossRef

25.

Scheffé H (1952) An analysis of variance for paired comparison. J Am Stat Assoc 147:381–400MathSciNetMATH

26.

Nakaya, H. (1970) A variation method of Scheffé’s method of pairwise comparison, Proceedings of sensory testing conference, The Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE). 11: 1-12. (In Japanese)

27.

Chang LW (1977) Neurotoxic effects of mercury-review. Environ Res 14(3):329–373CrossRef

28.

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (2001) Ionizing radiation, part 2: some internally deposited radionuclides, IARC monographs programme on the evaluation of carcinogenic hazards to humans, vol. 78, IARC Press, Lyon

29.

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (1997) Polychlorinated dibenzo-para-dioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans, IARC monographs programme on the evaluation of carcinogenic hazards to humans, vol. 69, IARC Press, Lyon

30.

Windfeld ES, Brooks MSL (2015) Medical waste management—a review. J Environ Manage 163:98–108CrossRef

31.

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (1993) Beryllium, cadmium, mercury, and exposures in the glass manufacturing iIndustry, IARC monographs programme on the evaluation of carcinogenic hazards to humans, vol. 58, IARC Press, Lyon

32.

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (1992) Solar and ultraviolet radiation, IARC monographs programme on the evaluation of carcinogenic hazards to humans, vol. 55, IARC Press, Lyon

33.

Laden F, Schwartz J, Speizer FE, Dockery DW (2006) Reduction in fine particulate air pollution and mortality—extended follow-up of the Harvard six cities study. Am J Resp Crit Care 173(6):667–672CrossRef

34.

Stansfeld SA, Berglund B, Clark C, Lopez-Barrio I, Fischer P, Ohrstrom E, Haines MM, Head J, Hygge S, van Kamp I (2005) Aircraft and road traffic noise and children’s cognition and health: a cross-national study. Lancet 365(9475):1942–1949CrossRef

35.

Cheng KE, McHugh JA, Deek FP (2013) On the use of paired comparisons to construct group preference scales for decision making. Group Decis Negot 22:519–540CrossRef

36.

Kendall MG (1985) Rank correlation methods, chapter 11 and 12, 2nd edn. Griffin, London

37.

Inoue H (2012) The theory and methods of sensory evaluation—Sensory evaluation analysis for real applications, chapter 6. JUSE press, Tokyo

38.

Olatunji BO, Sawchuk CN, Arrindell WA, Lohr JM (2005) Disgust sensitivity as a mediator of the sex differences in contamination fears. Pers Individ Differ 38(3):713–722CrossRef

39.

Diaz A, Belena A, Zueco J (2020) The role of age and gender in perceived vulnerability to infectious diseases. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(2):485CrossRef

40.

Van Riel W, Langeveld J, Herder P, Clemens F (2016) Valuing information for sewer replacement decisions. Water Sci Technol 74(4):796–804CrossRef

41.

Gallardo AH, Matsuzaki T, Aoki H (2014) Geological storage of nuclear wastes: insights following the Fukushima crisis, Energ. Policy 73:391–400

42.

Kato M, Ono N, Ishikawa H, Okuhara T, Okada M, Kiuchi T (2018) Lessons learned from previous environmental health crises: narratives of patients with Minamata disease in TV documentaries as the main media outlet. Cogent Arts & Humanities 5(1):1447780CrossRef

43.

Colocousis CR (2012) “It was tourism repellent, that’s what we were spraying”: natural amenities, environmental stigma, and redevelopment in a Postindustrial Mill town. Sociol Forum 27(3):756–776CrossRef

44.

Rozin P, Fallon A, Augustoni-Ziskind M (1985) The child’s conception of food contamination sensitivity to ”Disgusting” substances. Dev Psychol 21(6):1075–1079CrossRef

45.

Rozin P, Millman L, Nemeroff C (1986) Operation of the laws of sympathetic magic in disgust and other domains. J Pers Soc Psychol 50(4):703–712CrossRef

46.

Kecinski M, Keisner DK, Messer KD, Schulze WD (2018) Measuring stigma: the behavioral implications of disgust. Environ Resour Econ 70(1):131–146CrossRef

47.

McCluskey JJ, Rausser GC (2003) Stigmatized asset value: Is it temporary or long-term? Rev Econ Stat 85(2):276–285CrossRef

48.

Zwickle A, Cox JG, Zhuang J, Hamm JA, Upham BL, Chung M, Cruz S, Dearing JW (2019) The effect of dioxin contamination and remediation on property values. Int J Environ Res Pu 16(20):3900CrossRef

49.

Siegrist M, Gutscher H, Earle TC (2005) Perception of risk: the influence of general trust, and general confidence. J Risk Res 8(2):145–156CrossRef

50.

Dohmen T, Falk A, Huffman D, Sunde U, Schupp J, Wagner GG (2011) Individual risk attitudes: measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences. J Eur Econ Assoc 9(3):522–550CrossRef

51.

McIntyre E, Prior J, Connon ILC, Adams J, Madden B (2018) Sociodemographic predictors of residents worry about contaminated sites. Sci Total Environ 643:1623–1630CrossRef

52.

Grandjean P, Landrigan PJ (2006) Developmental neurotoxicity of industrial chemicals. Lancet 368(9553):2167–2178CrossRef

53.

Skanavis C, Koumouris GA, Petreniti V (2005) Public participation mechanisms in environmental disasters. Environ Manage 35(6):821–837CrossRef

54.

Park S, Johnson MA (2006) Awareness of fish advisories and mercury exposure in women of childbearing age. Nutr Rev 64(5):250–256CrossRef

55.

Wester J, Timpano KR, Cek D, Broad K (2016) The psychology of recycled water: factors predicting disgust and willingness to use. Water Resour Res 52(4):3212–3226CrossRef

56.

Menegaki AN, Mellon RC, Vrentzou A, Koumakis G, Tsagarakis KP (2009) What’s in a name: framing treated wastewater as recycled water increases willingness to use and willingness to pay. J Econ Psychol 30(3):285–292CrossRef

57.

Lober DJ, Green DP (1994) NIMBY or NIABY: a logit model of opposition to solid-waste-disposal facility siting. J Environ Manage 40(1):33–50CrossRef

58.

Peters EM, Burraston B, Mertz CK (2004) An emotion-based model of risk perception and stigma susceptibility: cognitive appraisals of emotion, affective reactivity, worldviews, and risk perceptions in the generation of technological stigma. Risk Anal 24(5):1349–1367CrossRef

59.

Akiyama T, Harashina S, Osako M (2005) How public opposition and distance affect waste management facility siting. J Jpn Soc Waste Manag Experts 16(6):429–440 (In Japanese)CrossRef

60.

Gallagher L, Ferreira S, Convery F (2008) Host community attitudes towards solid waste landfill infrastructure: comprehension before compensation. J Environ Plann Man 51(2):233–257CrossRef

61.

Oberholzer-Gee F, Mitsunari M (2006) Information regulation: do the victims of externalities pay attention? J Regul Econ 30:141–158CrossRef

Titel: The impact of cognitive aversion toward mercury on public attitude toward the construction of mercury wastes landfill site
verfasst von: Fumitake Takahashi
Publikationsdatum: 20.05.2023
Verlag: Springer Japan
Erschienen in: Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management / Ausgabe 5/2023
Print ISSN: 1438-4957
Elektronische ISSN: 1611-8227
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-023-01690-z

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2023

Cost of proper waste management of retorted mercury in artisanal and small-scale gold mining: global estimates and financial implications

How material flow cost accounting contributes to the SDGs through improving management decision-making

100-year simulation of mercury emissions from landfilled stabilized mercury waste

Critical enablers and inhibitors for economic sustainability in the supply and demand of end-of-life vehicles in Malaysia: a SWOT analysis

Assessment of heavy metal distribution and contamination in the sediment of the Ciujung Watershed, Banten Province, Indonesia

Preparation and characterization of cellulose nanocrystals from spent culture substrate of Auricularia auricula