Examining Localized Patterns of Air Quality Perception in Texas: A Spatial and Statistical Analysis

Abstract

Environmental and human health issues associated with outdoor air pollution, such as ozone, sulfur dioxide, and other pollutants in metropolitan regions, are an area of growing concern for both policy officials and the general public. Increasing attention from the news media, new health data, and public debate over the effectiveness of clean air regulations have raised the importance of air quality in the public consciousness. While public perceptions of air quality have been studied thoroughly dating back to the 1960s, little empirical research has been conducted to explain the spatial aspects of these perceptions, particularly at the local level. Although recent studies suggest characteristics of local setting are important in shaping perceptions of air quality, the roles of proximity, neighborhood characteristics, and location have not been clarified. This study seeks to improve understanding of the major factors shaping public perceptions of air quality by examining the spatial pattern of local risk perception, the role of socioeconomic characteristics in forming these perceptions, and the relationship between perceived and scientifically measured air pollution. First, we map the spatial pattern of local air quality perceptions using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) across the Dallas and Houston metropolitan areas. Next, we explain these perceptions through local contextual factors using both bivariate correlations and multivariate regression analysis. Results indicate that perceptions of air quality in the study areas are not significantly correlated with air quality based on readings of air monitoring stations. Instead, perceptions appear to be influenced by setting (urban vs. rural), state identification, access to information, and socioeconomic characteristics such as age, race, and political identification. We discuss the implications of the findings and provide direction on how further research can provide a deeper understanding of the local contextual factors influencing public perceptions.

Spatial Effect on Public Risk Perception of Natural Disaster: a Comparative Study in East Asia

“…In another study, researchers find out that American citizens' risk judgment towards terrorist attack is positively correlated with their geographical distance to the World Trade Center (Fischhoff et al, 2003). Meanwhile, a spatial mismatch between real risks and perceived risks by the public is reported as well, for example, Brody et al (2004)'s empirical study shows that people's perceptions of air quality in Texas, U.S.A. are not significantly correlated with scientifically measured pollution level in air monitoring stations. Therefore, as is pointed out, the spatial effect on environmental risk perception is still in lack of scientific and systematic study (Gattig & Hendrickx, 2007).…”

Pedestrians' perception of environmental stimuli through field surveys: Focus on particulate pollution

“…In the field of air quality, identifying relationships between perceived and actual levels of pollutants has not been possible (Brody et al, 2004). Due to the serious health implications of different air pollutants most of the work on perception has focused on the perceived risks and epidemiological studies (Oglesby, et al, 2000;Rotko et al, 2002;Kl¾boe et al, 2008, Llop et al, 2008Badland and Duncan, 2009).…”

“…Due to the serious health implications of different air pollutants most of the work on perception has focused on the perceived risks and epidemiological studies (Oglesby, et al, 2000;Rotko et al, 2002;Kl¾boe et al, 2008, Llop et al, 2008Badland and Duncan, 2009). While public perception studies have been dating back to the 1960s (Craik and Zube, 1976;Brody et al, 2004), only recently has empirical research started to examine the local level (Brody et al, 2004). Even in these cases, the data are usually stratified by neighbourhood and not measured or assessed at the local pedestrian level.…”

“…Recent studies on the local scale have provided information on place-specific conditions and evaluated how the location and its surroundings are important in the experience of air pollution (Day, 2007;Brody et al, 2004;Bonnes et al, 2007). Arguing that the psychological effects of air pollution may often be more important to well-being than the biophysical effects, the EXPOLIS project also linked annoyance with exposure to air pollution from vehicular traffic (PM2.5, PM10 and NO 2 ) at different cities across Europe (Rotko et al, 2002;Amudsen et al, 2008;Kl¾boe et al, 2008).…”

“…Furthermore, as the campus is reminiscent of suburban environments, perceptions are not subject to the urban vs. rural dichotomy that could lead to location being the parameter controlling perception, rather than air quality levels themselves (Brody et al, 2004). The field surveys involved questionnaire-guided interviews with the users of two sites on the UCSD campus (near 32.88¼N, 117.24¼W), one a key node for vehicular traffic and public transportation (TS) and the other a construction site (CS), where road surfacing work was conducted, bordering a park on one side and built up areas on the other.…”