Search

An increasing diversity of technologies are being used to remediate contaminated sites, yet there remains little understanding of the level of acceptance that residents living near these sites hold for these technologies, and what factors influence their level of acceptance. This lack of understanding hinders the remediation industry's ability to effectively engage with these residents about remediation technology selection, at a time when such engagement is become part and parcel of remediation policy and practice. The study develops on wider research into public acceptance of technologies, using data from a telephone survey of 2009 residents living near thirteen contaminated sites across Australia. Within the survey acceptance is measured through residents' level of support for the application of remediation technologies in their local area. Firstly, a regression analysis of closed-ended questions, and coding of open-ended questions are combined to identify the main predictors of residents' support for remediation technologies. Secondly, coding of open-ended questions was analysed using Crawford and Ostrom's Institutional Grammar Tool to identify norms and sanctions guiding residents' willingness to negotiate their support. The research identifies factors associated with the residents' personal and demographic characteristics, their physical context and engagement with institution during remediation processes, and the technologies themselves which predict residents' level of support for the application of remediation technologies. Bioremediation technologies had higher levels of support than chemical, thermal and physical technologies. Furthermore, the paper identifies a core set of norms and sanctions residents use to negotiate their level of support for remediation technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent decades the diversity of remediation technologies has increased significantly, with the breadth of technologies ranging from dig and dump to emergent technologies like phytoremediation and nanoremediation. The benefits of these technologies to the environment and human health are believed to be substantial. However, they also potentially constitute risks. Whilst there is a growing body of knowledge about the risks and benefits of these technologies from the perspective of experts, little is known about how residents perceive the risks and benefits of the application of these technologies to address contaminants in their local environment. This absence of knowledge poses a challenge to remediation practitioners and policy makers who are increasingly seeking to engage these affected local residents in choosing technology applications. Building on broader research into the perceived benefits and risks of technologies, and data from a telephone survey of 2009 residents living near 13 contaminated sites in Australia, regression analysis of closed-ended survey questions and coding of open-ended questions are combined to identify the main predictors of resident's perceived levels of risk and benefit to resident's health and to their local environment from remediation technologies. This research identifies a range of factors associated with the residents' physical context, their engagement with institutions during remediation processes, and the technologies which are associated with residents' level of perceived risk and benefit for human health and the local environment. The analysis found that bioremediation technologies were perceived as less risky and more beneficial than chemical, thermal and physical technologies. The paper also supports broader technology research that reports an inverse correlation between levels of perceived risks and benefits. In addition, the paper reveals the types of risks and benefits to human health and the local environment that residents most commonly associate with remediation technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The choice of technologies used to remediate contaminated environments is increasingly made through engagement with a multitude of stakeholders including affected residents. Despite this, little is known about how residents perceive remediation technology applications. In this study a choice experiment is designed to explore ways of understanding and measuring residents' preferences for different remediation technologies approaches using a sample of 944 residents in New South Wales, Australia. Analysis reveals that the residents' acceptability of remediation technologies can be explained by both the efficacy of the technology in improving the environmental quality of the community, and the reputational value of the technology. In particular it is found that residents prefer Monitor Natural Attenuation and Bioremediation to other remediation technologies. In particular they are willing to pay an increase in yearly taxes of $44.60 and $41.15 respectively for implementing such technologies instead of alternative remediation technologies like Chemical remediation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]