Effects of Residential Environmental Screening and Perception Surveys on Superfund Environmental Health Risk Perceptions

Abstract

Residents at one of the nation’s largest and longest-operating Superfund sites (Butte, Montana) have expressed environmental health risk perceptions that often diverge from those of EPA and other official stakeholders responsible for the investigation and remediation of site contamination aimed at protecting human health and the environment. A random sample of Butte residents participated in a study of how home-based environmental screening influences environmental health perceptions. Participants completed surveys measuring environmental health perceptions before and after a home site screening of soil and drinking water for lead and arsenic conducted by the research team. Local air monitoring for the same contaminants was also completed during the study period. The home-based screening intervention improved the alignment of subjective participant environmental health perceptions with objective environmental screening measures. Key features of the process that helped achieve this effect included (1) co-locating the collection of participant perceptions and individualized screening measurements; (2) sharing environmental screening results in a clear and unbiased manner; and (3) conducting this work independent of agencies and organizations with direct responsibility for Superfund-related cleanup activities. Empowering residents of a Superfund community with knowledge of the specific kinds and levels of environmental contamination in their home environment may help overcome the gap between agency conclusions regarding environmental health risk and the perceptions of community members.

Analyzing Public Environmental Concerns at the Threshold to Reduce Urban Air Pollution

“…The environmental advantages of these activities were brought to light by this campaign [57]. Residents' opinions of environmental health have also improved as a result of education regarding the precise kinds and concentrations of pollution in their homes [58]. By informing the public about the threat of air pollution and increasing stakeholder engagement, governments can more effectively utilize financial resources and implement more sustainable solutions [59].…”

Exploring the Nexus between Transparency and Citizens’ Intention to Participate in Climate Change Policy-Making

“…Furthermore, in a study [53], it was revealed that "community acceptance," which requires the agency to ensure that the "affected community" has been involved in the process from the beginning, understands the process reasonably, and has the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to agency decision-making. When referencing this study, it is possible to consider the mediating role of community acceptance between transparency and the intention to participate in policy-making.…”

The “Local Neighborhood” Effect of Environmental Regulation on Green Innovation Efficiency: Evidence from China

“…This view is simply summarized as the “compliance cost argument”. Chintrakam and Weber [ 19 ] found by investigating the manufacturing statistics of 48 states in the United States that the strengthening of environmental regulation will make the manufacturing industry inefficient, which may be due to a lack of sufficient funds for the development of environmental protection patents due to environmental regulation [ 20 ]. Kneller and Manderson [ 6 ] examine environmental regulation and creative activities in the UK manufacturing sector from 2000 to 2006 and show that ER can crowd out firms’ investment in innovation, particularly in industries with high environmental costs.…”