A method for the assessment of changes in environmental perception during an EIA process

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Volumn 28, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 533-545

  Peterlin, Monika ^a   Kross, Burton C ^b   Kontic, Branko ^c  

^a Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia   (Slovenia)

^b Management Resources Network Inc   (United States)

^c JO EF STEFAN INSTITUTE   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Environmental impact assessment; Environmental information; Institutional constraints; Public participation; Public perception

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; PERSONNEL; POPULATION STATISTICS; PORTS AND HARBORS;

ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION; ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES; ENVIRONMENTAL PERCEPTIONS; GENERAL POPULATIONS; INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS; METHOD OF MEASUREMENTS; PUBLIC PARTICIPATION; PUBLIC PERCEPTION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCES;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE; INFORMATION; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; LOCAL PARTICIPATION; PERCEPTION;

EID: 54049154371     PISSN: 01959255     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2008.01.001     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Baines J. Beyond Compromise: Building Consensus in Environmental Planning and Decision-making (1995), The Environment Council, London, UK
2. Bechtel R.B. Environment and Behaviour (1997), SAGE Publications, London
3. Bedau H.A. Ethical aspects of environmental decision-making. In: Bedau H.A. (Ed). Environmental Decision Making: A Multidisciplinary Perspective (1991), Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York 176-179
4. Bell R.G., and Wilson J. How much is too much?. In: Linkov I., and Oliviera P. (Eds). Assessment and Management of Environmental Risks, Cost-efficient methods and applications. NATO Science Series (2001), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 11-15
5. Black T.R. Doing quantitative research in the social sciences: an integrated approach to research design, measurement and statistics (1999), Sage Publications, London
6. Covello V.T. Risk communication. In: Calow J. (Ed). Handbook of Environmental Risk Assessment and Management (1998), Blackwell Science Ltd., Oxford 520-521
7. Cvetkovich G., and Lofstedt R. Social trust and the management of risk (1999), Earth scan, London
8. DEFRA. Guidelines for Environmental Risk Assessment and Management (2007). http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/risk/eramguide/02.htm http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/risk/eramguide/02.htm (accessed on March 15)
9. European Comission. Commission's 5 Years Report On the Application and Effectiveness of the EIA Directive (Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directive 97/11/EC): How successful are the Member States in implementing the EIA Directive? (2003), Brusseles. http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/03/876&format =HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=en IP/03/876, http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/03/876&fo rmat=HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=en (accessed on November 15, 2007)
10. Freeman A.M. Evaluating changes in risk and risk perceptions by revealed preferences. In: Bromley D.W. (Ed). The Handbook of Environmental Economics (1995), Blackwell, Oxford 615-628
11. Frewer L. Risk perception, social trust and public participation in strategic decision making: implications for emerging technologies. R Swed Acad Sci Ambio 28/6 (1999) 569-574
12. Frewer L. The public and effective risk communication. Toxicol. Lett. 149 (2004) 91-97
13. Getzner M. Investigating public decisions about protecting wetlands. J Environ Manag 64 (2002) 237-246
14. Golobič M., and Zakrajšek F. Challenges of regulating integrated impact assessment: The case of Slovenia. In: George C., and Kirkpatrick C. (Eds). Impact assessment and sustainable development: European practice and experience (2007), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham 284-293
15. Hartley N., and Wood C. Public participation in environmental impact assessment - implementing the Aarhus Convention. EIA Rev 25 (2005) 319-340
16. (IMP)3, Improving the Implementation of Environmental Impact Assessment, Sixth Framework Programme Specific Targeted Research Project, Projects subject to EIA, D 2.4 Report WP 4, Austrian Institute for Regional Studies and Spatial Planning, 2006 http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/en/umweltschutz/uvpsupemas/uvpoesterreich1 /schwerpunkte/imp3/?wai=1 (accessed on November 15, 2007)
17. Johnson B., and Frank P. Public understanding of environmental impacts of electricity deregulation. Energy Policy 34 12 (2006) 1332-1343
18. Kontic B. Why are some experts more credible than others?. EIA Rev 20 (2000) 427-434
19. Kontić B., Bohanec M., and Urbančič T. An experiment in participative environmental decision making. Environmentalist 26 (2006) 5-15
20. Laukkanen S., Kangas A., and Kangas J. Applying voting theory in natural resource management: a case of multi-criteria group decision support. J Environ Manag 64 (2002) 127-137
21. Matsui Y., Tanaka M., and Ohsako M. Study of the effect of political measures on the citizen participation rate in recycling and on the environmental load reduction. Waste Management 27 8 (2007) S9-S20
22. O'Connor M., and Splash C.L. Introduction. In: O'Connor M., and Splash C.L. (Eds). Valuation and the Environment: Theory, method and practice. Advances in Ecological Economics (1999), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham 1-35
23. Peterlin M., Kontic B., and Kross B.C. Public perception of environmental pressures within the Slovene coastal zone. Ocean Coast Manag 48 (2005) 198-204
24. Prato T. Multiple attribute evaluation of landscape management. J Environ Manag 60 (2000) 325-337
25. Ramanathan R.A. Note on the use of the analytic hierarchy process for environmental impact assessment. J Environ Manag 63 (2001) 27-35
26. Siebenhuener B., and Barth V. The role of computer modelling in participatory integrated assessments. EIA Review 25 (2005) 367-389
27. Slovic P. Perceived risk, trust and democracy. Risk Anal 13 (1993) 675-682
28. Toma L., and Mathijs E. Environmental risk perception, environmental concern and propensity to participate in organic farming programmes. J Environ Manag 83 2 (2007) 145-157
29. Vincente G., and Partidario M.R. SEA - enhancing communication for better environmental decisions. EIA Rev 26 (2006) 696-706
30. Waldeck S., Morrison-Saunders A., and Annandale D. Effectiveness of non-legal EIA guidance from the perspective of consultants in Western Australia. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 21 (2003) 251-256
31. Wood G., and Becker J. Discretionary judgement in local planning authority decision making: screening development proposals for environmental impact assessment. J Environ Plan Manag 48 3 (2005) 349-371