Low risks, high public concern? the cases of persistent organic pollutants (POPs), heavy metals, and nanotech particles

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 185-198

  Scholz, Roland W ^a   Siegrist, Michael ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Environmental risk; Heavy metals; Nanotechnology; Persistent organic pollutants (POPs); Risk assessment; Risk perception

Indexed keywords

EID: 77950989882     PISSN: 10807039     EISSN: 15497860     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10807030903459114     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Agricola G. 1565. De re metallica libri XII (translated by HC Hoover and LH Hoover). Dover, New York, NY, USA
2. Allanou R. 2007. EINECS, European Inventory of Existing Commercial Chemical Substances. Available at http://ecb.jrc.it/esis/index.php?PGM=ein
3. Beck U. 1986. Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in einer andere Moderne. Suhrkamp, Frank- furt am Main, Germany
4. Beck U and Sznaider N. 2006. Unpacking cosmopolitanism for the social sciences: A research agenda. Brit J Sociol 57(1):1-23
5. Beehler GP, McGuinness BM, and Vena JE. 2001. Polluted fish, sources of knowledge, and the perception of risk: Contextualizing African American anglers' sport fishing practices. Hum Organ 60(3):288-97
6. Bennet DH, McKone TE, and Kastenberg WE. 2002. Characteristic time, characteristic travel distance, and population-based potential dose in a multimedia environment: A case study. In: Paustenbach DJ (ed), Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. Theory and Practice, pp 619-43. Wiley, New York, NY, USA
7. Brachinger HW and Weber M. 1997. Risk as a primitive: A survey of measures of perceived risk. OR Spectrum 19(4):235-94
8. Carson R. 1962. Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA, USA
9. Cobb MD and Macoubrie J. 2004. Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust. J Nanopart Res 6:395-405
10. Cullen H and Frey C. 1999. Probabilistic Techniques in Assessing Exposure Assessment. A Handbook Dealing with Variability and Uncertainty in Models and Inputs. Plenum, New York, NY, USA
11. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2006. Statistical Database. Available at http://faostat.fao.org
12. Finucane ML, Alhakami A, Slovic P, et al. 2000. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. J Behav Decis Making 13:1-17
13. Fishburn PC. 1982. The Foundations of Expected Utility. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
14. Fries GF. 2002. Transport of persistent organic pollutants to animal products: Fundamental principles and application to health risk assessment. In: Paustenbach DJ (ed), Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. Theory and Practice, pp 873-94. Wiley, New York, NY, USA
15. Gigerenzer G. 2006. Out of the frying pan into the fire: Behavioral reactions to terrorist attacks. Risk Anal 26(2):347-51
16. Grasmück D and Scholz RW. 2005. Risk perception of heavy metal soil contamination by high- exposed and low-exposed inhabitants: The role of knowledge and emotional concerns. Risk Anal 25(3):611-22
17. Hertwich EG, Pease WS, and McKone TE. 1998. Evaluating toxic impact assessment methods: What works best? Environ Sci Technol 32(5):138A-144A
18. Kahneman D and Tversky A. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263-91
19. Kahneman D and Tversky A. 2000. Choices, Values, and Frames. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
20. Krewski D, Oxman A, and Torrance G.W. 1989. A decision-oriented framework for evaluation of environmental risk management strategies: A case study of lead in gasoline: In D.J. Paustenbach (Ed.), The risk assessment of environmental and human health hazard. A textbook of case studies (pp. 1047-1063). Wiley, NY, USA.
21. Krogmann U, Gibson V, and Chess C 2001. Land application of sewage sludge: Perceptions of New Jersey vegetable farmers. Waste Manage Res 19(2):115-25
22. Krohn W and Weingart P. 1987. Nuclear-power as a social experiment-European political fall out from the Chernobyl meltdown. Sci Technol Hum Val 12(2):52-8
23. Laplace PS. 1816, 1921. Essai philosophique sur les probabilités [Philosophical essay on probabilties]. Gauthier-Villars, Paris, France
24. Lee DH, Lee IK, Song K, et al. 2006. A strong dose-response relation between serum concentrations of persistent organic pollutants and diabetes-Results from the National Health and Examination Survey 1999-2002. Diabetes Care 29(7):1638-1644
25. Luhmann N. 1993. Risiko und Gefahr. In: Krohn and Krücken G (eds), Riskante Technologien: Reflexion und Regulation (pp 138-185). Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, Germany
26. Mertz CK, Slovic P, and Purchase IFH. 1998. Judgments of chemical risks: Comparisons among senior managers, toxicologists, and the public. Risk Anal 18(4):391-404
27. Morgan K. 2005. Development of a preliminary framework for informing the risk analysis and risk management of nanoparticles. Risk Anal 25(6):1621-35
28. Mumpower J, Menkes J, and Covello T (eds). 1986. Risk Evaluation and Management. Plenum, New York, NY, USA
29. NRC (National Research Council). 1983. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., USA
30. Nothbaum N. 1997. Experten-Entscheidung unter Unsicherheit: Kognitive Didaktik und situative Rahmung bei der Erhebung von Verteilungswissen [Expert decisions under uncertainty: Cognitive didactics and situative framing in the determination of distributive knowledge]. Lang, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
31. Oberdörster G, Oberdörster E, and Oberdörster J. 2005. Nanotoxicology: An emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Environ Health Persp 113:823-39
32. Oppenheim L. 1977. Ancient Mesopotamia. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA
33. Paustenbach DJ. 1989. A survey of health risk assessment. In: Paustenbach DJ (ed), The Risk Assessment of Environmental and Human Health Hazards: A Textbook of Case Studies, pp 27-124. Wiley, New York, NY, USA
34. Paustenbach DJ (ed). 2002. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. Theory and Practice. (Foreword). Wiley, New York, NY, USA
35. Pusztai A and Bardocz S. 2006. The future of nanotechnology in food science and nutrition: Can science predict its safety? In: Hunt G and Mehta MD (eds), Nanotechnology: Risk, Ethics and Law, pp 167-79. Earthscan, London, UK
36. Renn O and Roco MC. 2006. Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance. J Nanopart Res 8:153-91
37. Rothman KJ and Greenland S. 1998. Modern Epidemiology, 2nd ed. Lippincott, Williams & Wilkens, Philadelphia, PA, USA
38. Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering. 2004. Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties. Royal Society, London, UK
39. Sanguansri P and Augustin MA. 2006. Nanoscale materials development-A food industry perspective. Trends Food Sci Tech 17:547-56
40. Scholz RW and Schnabel U. 2006. Decision making under uncertainty in case of soil remediation. J Environ Manage 80(2):132-47
41. Scholz RW and Tietje O. 2002. Embedded Case Study Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA
42. Scholz RW, May TW, Hefer B, et al. N. 1991. Die Anwendung des Donator-Akzeptor-Modells am Beispiel Blei für den Pfad "Boden-Mensch." [An application of the donator-acceptator model for the lead path "soil-humans"]. In: Bütow E (ed), Ableitung von Sanierungswerten für kontaminierte Böden [Determination of Remediation Standards for Contaminated Soils], pp 55-98. Schmidt, Berlin, Germany
43. Scholz RW, May TW, Nothbaum N, et al. 1992. Induktivstochastische Risikoabschätzung mit dem Donator-Akzeptor-Modell am Beispiel der Gesundheitsbelastung durch cadmiumbelastete Weizenackerböden. [An Inductive and Stochastic Risk Evaluation with the Donator-Acceptor Model: The Example of the Health Consequences of Cadmium Contaminated Soils of Wheat Fields]. In: Eimeren U and Ulm K (eds), Gesundheit und Umwelt (pp 57-61). Springer, Berlin, Germany
44. Scholz RW, Heitzer A, May TW, et al. 1997. Datenqualität und Risikoanalysen: Das Risiko- handlungsmodell zur Altlastenbearbeitung [Data quality and risk analyses. The risk action model of soil remediation]. In: Schulte-Hostede S., Freitag R, Kettrup A, and Fresenius W (eds), Altlastenbewertung. Datenanalyse und Gefahrenbewertung [Evaluation of Soil Remediation Cases: Analysis of Data and Evaluation of Risks], pp 1-29. Ecomed-Verlag, Landsberg, Germany
45. Schwarzenbach RP, Escher BI, Fenner K, et al. 2006. The challenge of micropollutants in aquatic systems. Science 313(5790):1072-7
46. Siegrist M, Keller C, and Kiers HAL. 2005. A new look at the psychometric paradigm of perception of hazards. Risk Anal 25(1):211-22
47. Siegrist M, Keller C, and Cousin ME. 2006. Implicit attitudes toward nuclear power and mobile phone base stations: Support for the affect heuristic. Risk Anal 26(4):1021-9
48. Siegrist M, Cousin ME, Kastenholz H, et al. 2007a. Public acceptance of nanotechnology foods and food packaging: The influence of affect and trust. Appetite 49(2):459-66
49. Siegrist M, Keller C, Kastenholz H, et al. 2007b. Laypeople's and experts' perception of nanotechnology hazards. Risk Anal 27(1):59-69
50. Slovic P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236:280-5
51. Slovic P. 2001. The risk game (Reprintedfrom'Theriskgame'). JHazard Mater 86(1-3):17-24
52. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, and Lichtenstein S. 1979. Rating the risks. Environment 21:14-20; 36-9
53. Slovic P, Malmfors T, Krewski D, et al. 1995. Intuitive toxicology. II. Expert and lay judgments of chemical risks in Canada. Risk Anal 15(6):661-75
54. Slovic P, Finucane M, Peters E, et al. 2002. The affect heuristic. In: T Gilovich, D Griffin, and D Kahneman (eds), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, pp 397-420. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
55. Sokolowska J. 2006. Risk perception and acceptance-One process or two? The impact of aspirations on perceived risk and preferences. Exp Psychol 53(4):247-59
56. Steven M. 2007. Toxicity, Lead. Available at http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/topic293.htm
57. Tucker M and Napier TL. 1998. Perceptions of risk associated with use of farm chemicals: Implications for conservation initiatives. Environ Manage 22(4):575-87
58. Tucker M and Napier TL. 2001. Determinants of perceived agricultural chemical risk in three watersheds in the Midwestern United States. J Rural Stud 17(2):219-33
59. Wallsten TS and Whitfield RG. 1986. Assessing the Risks to Young Children of Three Effects Associated with Elevated Blood-Lead Levels. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, USA
60. Weber O, Scholz RW, Bühlmann R, et al. 2001. Risk perception of heavy metal soil contamination and attitudes to decontamination strategies. Risk Anal 21(5):967-77