Search

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 are increasingly made via engagement with affected local residents. Despite this, little is known about how residents perceive remediation technology applications. Building on the findings of broader technology worry research, and drawing on data from a telephone survey of 2009 residents living near thirteen contaminated sites in Australia, regression analysis of closed-ended survey questions and coding analysis of open-ended survey questions are combined to identify the main predictors of worries concerning particular remediation technologies, and how worry affects them. This suggests respondents are more worried about the application of chemical remediation technologies than the application of physical and thermal technologies, which in turn caused more worry than the application of biotechnology. The paper suggests that these worries can be reduced via direct engagement with residents about remediation technologies, suggesting that such engagement can provide knowledge that improves remediation technology decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Efforts to achieve sustainability are transforming the norms, rules and values that affect the remediation of contaminated environments. This is altering the ways in which remediation impacts on the total environment. Despite this transformation, few studies have provided systematic insights into the diverse norms and rules that drive the implementation of sustainable remediation at contaminated sites, and no studies have investigated how values motivate compliance with these norms and rules. This study is a systematic analysis of the rules, norms and motivational values embedded in sustainable remediation processes at three sites across Australia, using in-depth interviews conducted with 18 participants between 2011 and 2014, through the application of Crawford and Ostrom's Institutional Grammar and Schwartz's value framework. These approaches offered methods for identifying the rules, norms, and motivational values that guided participants' actions within remediation processes at these sites. The findings identify a core set of 16 norms and 18 rules (sanctions) used by participants to implement sustainable remediation at the sites. These norms and rules: define the position of participants within the process, provide means for incorporating sustainability into established remediation practices, and define the scope of outcomes that constitute sustainable remediation. The findings revealed that motivational values focused on public interest and self-interest influenced participants' compliance with norms and rules. The findings also found strong interdependence between the norms and rules (sanctions) within the remediation processes and the normative principles operating within the broader domain of environmental management and planning. The paper concludes with a discussion of: the system of norms operating within sustainable remediation (which far exceed those associated with ESD); their link, through rules (sanctions) to contemporary styles of regulatory enforcement; and the underlying balance of public-interest values and self-interest values that drives participants' involvement in sustainable remediation. [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]