From risk analysis to From risk analysis to risk perception – a case risk perception – a case study on systemic risks study on systemic risks

Maria Luísa LimaMaria Luísa Lima, ISCTE , ISCTE

IST, 4th May 2004

S&T and the management of risk: implications for technology policy

Focus of the Focus of the presentationpresentation A case study on the A case study on the

management of risk management of risk associated to the construction associated to the construction of a waste incinerator.of a waste incinerator.– A technological innovation in A technological innovation in

PortugalPortugal– A great deal of uncertainty around A great deal of uncertainty around

the consequences of the incineratorthe consequences of the incinerator– The public debate was framed by a The public debate was framed by a

scientific debatescientific debate

Structure of the Structure of the presentationpresentation The context of the decision and The context of the decision and

the follow-up studythe follow-up study The interface between risk The interface between risk

analysis and risk perception analysis and risk perception during the processduring the process

The consequences for risk The consequences for risk managementmanagement

The context of the The context of the decision to construct the decision to construct the incinerator (1)incinerator (1) Enormous increase in waste Enormous increase in waste

productionproduction Several municipalities in the North and Several municipalities in the North and

some others in the South decided to some others in the South decided to joint to built two waste incineratorsjoint to built two waste incinerators

Environmental groups contested this Environmental groups contested this decisiondecision

Local movements emerged to fight Local movements emerged to fight against the incinerator (specially in against the incinerator (specially in Lisbon) Lisbon)

The context of the The context of the decision to construct the decision to construct the incinerator (2)incinerator (2) An Environmental Impact An Environmental Impact

Assessment Study was conducted Assessment Study was conducted for each sitefor each site

It was one of the first EIA It was one of the first EIA processes in Portugal processes in Portugal

It included a social-psychological It included a social-psychological partpart

Risk analysis and risk Risk analysis and risk perceptionperception Social Psychological part and Risk Social Psychological part and Risk

perception were only included in the perception were only included in the EIA study because there was a great EIA study because there was a great deal of media coverage of the protestsdeal of media coverage of the protests

Risk perception was tolerated, but Risk perception was tolerated, but conceived as an erroneous approach conceived as an erroneous approach to the riskto the risk

But there is no clear scientific But there is no clear scientific evidence for the absence of effects to evidence for the absence of effects to public health public health (Hu and Shy, 2001) (Hu and Shy, 2001)

Theoretical Model of Theoretical Model of Social Psychological Social Psychological ImpactsImpacts

Objective features of the Environment

Noise Air PollutionWater pollution

Moderating variables(meaning)

Local identityAttitude toward LIPOR II Distance to LIPORII

Sources of Impact

Annoyance (noise) Annoyance (smell & smog) Perceived threat

Social Psychological

Impacts

StressAnxietyDepression

% of residents against % of residents against the incineratorthe incinerator

0

10

20

30

40

50

2Km 5km 10km

Lisbon study Oporto study

Prediction of Prediction of attitudes attitudes (Explained variance =66%)(Explained variance =66%)

Risk perception

ExpectationsAttitude towards the incinerator

-.33

.26

Adj R2=.66Trust env. group -.17

Distance to the site.13

DecisionDecision

To built the incinerator, but:To built the incinerator, but:– A follow up studyA follow up study was needed in was needed in

order to ensure the correctness of order to ensure the correctness of the results of the EIA study. the results of the EIA study.

– A communication strategyA communication strategy was was needed to ensure that the residents needed to ensure that the residents were informed about the incinerator were informed about the incinerator and could control the processand could control the process

Evaluating systemic Evaluating systemic risksrisks

The follow-up study The follow-up study includedincluded Environmental follow-upEnvironmental follow-up

– Water resources (DG-UA)Water resources (DG-UA)– Air quality (IDAD-UA)Air quality (IDAD-UA)– Biology (water and surface) (DB-UA)Biology (water and surface) (DB-UA)– Noise (DAO-UA)Noise (DAO-UA)

Public health follow-up (ISCBAS)Public health follow-up (ISCBAS) Social Psychological follow-up Social Psychological follow-up

(CIS-ISCTE)(CIS-ISCTE)

The procedure of the The procedure of the SPF-USPF-U

x

• Regular data collection by surveys

• Localities close to the site::• 2Kms: 6 2Kms: 6

villagesvillages• 5 kms: 3 towns5 kms: 3 towns• 10 Kms: Oporto10 Kms: Oporto

Surveys assessedSurveys assessed

AtitudesAtitudes towards the incinerator ( towards the incinerator (=.78)=.78) Risk perceptionRisk perception (perceived likelihood of (perceived likelihood of

negative consequences) (negative consequences) (=.93)=.93) Perceived environmental qualityPerceived environmental quality: annoyance : annoyance

due to daytime noise (due to daytime noise (=.85), nighttime =.85), nighttime noise (noise (=.91), air pollution (=.91), air pollution (=.89)=.89)

Psychological sufferingPsychological suffering: depression (: depression (=.67), =.67), anxiety (anxiety (=.68) =.68) (HADS, Zigmond et al., (HADS, Zigmond et al., 1983) 1983) and stress (and stress (=.69) =.69) (PSS-4, Cohen et (PSS-4, Cohen et al, 1983). al, 1983).

12 waves by now 12 waves by now

May 1997 743May 1998 300

February 1999 271July 1999 257

March 2000 315February 2001 301

July 2001 301February 2002 300

July 2002 300February 2003 307

July 2003 300February 2004 302

+/- 300 interviews +/- 300 interviews in each wavein each wave

3997 interviews to 1020 different

residents(drop outs <20%)

3 focus groups3 focus groups

Communication Communication strategystrategy Regular meetings with a Committee of Regular meetings with a Committee of

residentsresidents Information center and a phone line Information center and a phone line An environmental education centerAn environmental education center Contacts with schools and Contacts with schools and

collectivities, open dayscollectivities, open days A newsletter, regularly delivered in the A newsletter, regularly delivered in the

mail boxmail box http://www.lipor.pthttp://www.lipor.pt

Evolution of the Evolution of the attitudesattitudes(May 97- July 03)(May 97- July 03)

Local de residência

>2Km<2Km

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

Attitudes became more positive in the group living closer to the incinerator

Evolution of risk Evolution of risk perceptionperception(July 99- July 03)(July 99- July 03)

Risk perception Risk perception has significantly has significantly lowered in the lowered in the group living group living closer to the sitecloser to the site

Local de residência

>2Km<2Km

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

Annoyance due to Annoyance due to odoursodours

A more salient A more salient problem during problem during the summerthe summer

It is visible an It is visible an increase after the increase after the incinerator incinerator started to workstarted to work

Local de residência

>2Km<2Km

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

Mai97

Mai98

Mar99

Jul99

Fev00

Fev01

Jul01

Fev02

Jul02

Fev03

Jul03

Psychological sufferingPsychological suffering

Increases during Increases during the construction the construction phase and when phase and when the incinerator the incinerator started to workstarted to work

The habituation The habituation process in slower process in slower in this case in this case

Local de Residência

>2Km<2Km

4,5

4,0

3,5

3,0

2,5

2,0

1,5

1,0

,5

Environmental predictors Environmental predictors of psychological of psychological suffering suffering (more distant sample) (more distant sample)

Annoyance due to air pollution

Annoyance due to daytime noise

Psychological suffering

0,15

0,15 R2=0,07

Environmental predictors Environmental predictors of psychological of psychological suffering suffering (closer sample)(closer sample)

0,24

0,18R2=0,18

Perceived risk

0,14

Annoyance due to air pollution

Annoyance due to daytime noise

Psychological suffering

Giving meaning to the Giving meaning to the environmental changes environmental changes (from the focus groups)(from the focus groups)

““Now I notice that the plants are different Now I notice that the plants are different (…) they get mildium, I don´t know, they (…) they get mildium, I don´t know, they become brown, with little brown spots. become brown, with little brown spots. Potatoes appear to be deformed… Yes, I Potatoes appear to be deformed… Yes, I think that there has been a change in the think that there has been a change in the plants” (W1).plants” (W1).

““My mother has now some respiratory My mother has now some respiratory problems. She had never had bronchitis. problems. She had never had bronchitis. Some years ago, she started to have Some years ago, she started to have bronchitis. I don´t know. It can be a bronchitis. I don´t know. It can be a consequence of her age. But the incinerator consequence of her age. But the incinerator can also have aggravated it” (W2). can also have aggravated it” (W2).

Hypothetical linkHypothetical link

Environmental annoyance

Interpretation as danger

Risk perception

Psychological suffering

Is this level of Is this level of psychological suffering psychological suffering higher than in other higher than in other industrial areas?industrial areas? study conducted with validated study conducted with validated

psychological instrumentspsychological instruments comparison between residents comparison between residents

near Lipor and those living innear Lipor and those living in– Estarreja (industry, air pollution) Estarreja (industry, air pollution) – Santo Tirso (industy, water pollution) Santo Tirso (industy, water pollution) – Cacia (industry, odour problem)Cacia (industry, odour problem)– Ermesinde (former odour problem)Ermesinde (former odour problem)

demographic variables controlleddemographic variables controlled

Psychological well Psychological well beingbeing

Locality

Ermesinde

Santo Tirso

Estarreja

Cacia

zona Lipor

BE

P_G

120

100

80

60

40

20

It is one of It is one of the highest the highest areas in areas in well beingwell being

Depression (HADS)Depression (HADS)

Locality

Ermesinde

Santo Tirso

Estarreja

Cacia

zona Lipor

20

10

0

-10

Medium levels Medium levels of depressionof depression

Anxiety (HADS)Anxiety (HADS)

Locality

Ermesinde

Santo Tirso

Estarreja

Cacia

zona Lipor

30

20

10

0

-10

Medium levels Medium levels of anxietyof anxiety

Coping - denialCoping - denial

Locality

Ermesinde

Santo Tirso

Estarreja

Cacia

zona Lipor

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

The lowest level of denial

After 7 years of After 7 years of studies…studies… Some environmental problems have Some environmental problems have

been detected and minimized (e.g. been detected and minimized (e.g. water pollution)water pollution)

Some new problems occurred and Some new problems occurred and were solved (e.g. changes in the noise were solved (e.g. changes in the noise legislation)legislation)

Residents became particularly aware Residents became particularly aware of the risks (costs to well-being)of the risks (costs to well-being)

The communication strategy increased The communication strategy increased the sense of control the sense of control

Comparatively, the levels of well being Comparatively, the levels of well being are good.are good.

Risk perception Risk perception

Was viewed as a bogus variableWas viewed as a bogus variable Turned out to be a central one to Turned out to be a central one to

understand the consequences of understand the consequences of “living near the fire” to the “living near the fire” to the quality of life of the residentsquality of life of the residents

On the real costs of On the real costs of risk perceptionrisk perception

This case study shows that the This case study shows that the subjective evaluation of risk should be subjective evaluation of risk should be taken seriously taken seriously

For those exposed to the risk, For those exposed to the risk, risk perception is associated to higher risk perception is associated to higher levels of psychological suffering. levels of psychological suffering.

This occurs because environmental This occurs because environmental changes are interpreted as dangerouschanges are interpreted as dangerous

On the real On the real consequences of these consequences of these studiesstudies The regular attention to the public The regular attention to the public

was important because this is a was important because this is a new and controversial technology new and controversial technology and their knowledge and and their knowledge and experience should also be taken experience should also be taken into considerationinto consideration

The information strategy allowed a The information strategy allowed a sense of control over the processsense of control over the process

Risk managementRisk management

It was carefully done, and lots of It was carefully done, and lots of (scientific) information was gathered in (scientific) information was gathered in order to describe and minimize the risksorder to describe and minimize the risks

Subjective risk was assessed, and it was Subjective risk was assessed, and it was proven to be a cause of a diminished proven to be a cause of a diminished sense of well beingsense of well being

Habituation was accompanied by an Habituation was accompanied by an increased sense of controlincreased sense of control

The communication strategy was The communication strategy was probably a fundamental instrument to probably a fundamental instrument to this achievementthis achievement