Search

Air pollution and other environmental hazards are often imperceptible and need to be made publicly visible. The paper argues for the importance of visualizations in drawing public attention to imperceptible hazards and in providing the public with access to empirical data describing the risks. It also argues for critical inquiry into hazards' selective visibility as it is produced by visualizations. The impact of visualizations and their selective visibility are considered through the example of a public art project called Particle Falls installed in 2014 in Pittsburgh, a city with a long history of both ignoring air pollution and working to ameliorate this problem. I examine the impact and selective visibility of Particle Falls by considering the underlying production of data, as well as context and support systems for this visualization, and by comparing it with other visualizations of local air quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a response to Waddington et al. who argue that there was insufficient public health benefit to justify the relocation of several hundred thousand individuals after the Chernobyl and perhaps Fukushima nuclear accidents. We believe the arguments are not defensible either from a radiological/public health point of view, or from a consideration of costs, and we are skeptical of the use of the "J-value assessment" as a foundation to reach these conclusions. There is debate about the health consequences of exposure to ionizing radiation; data on health impacts are often uncertain and incomplete, and therefore not the basis on which to hesitate to evacuate those affected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay examines lay experiences of radiation—the hazard imperceptible with unaided senses—and how these experiences are shaped. Analysis is conducted on the basis of participant observation and interviews in Belarusian rural areas affected after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident. I argue that radiation risks and health effects are not always obvious or immediately observable for those experiencing them, and they should be articulated. The paper compares various opportunities for articulation, including the context of radiological testing and administrative contexts, and describes the kinds of articulations they make possible. I conclude that limited opportunities for articulation result in limited lay recognition of radioactive contamination and their own health effects. The analysis implies that affected lay populations cannot always be assumed to be the most risk-conscious and hold special knowledge about radiation effects independently of scientific and administrative definitions of it. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]