Abstract
No one can deny that risk is one of the most frequent words of the political, economical and ecological arenas. Its major accessibility is probably related with both large industrial breakdowns around the world and the menace that those breakdowns represent to the vital perception of control of the human being (Palma-Oliveira 1992). Furthermore risk is, almost by definition, controversial. In recent decades, there has been continuous debate between those that, about a certain activity or facility, consider that a given risk (for instance, to human health) is acceptable and others that judge it as a menace. Who is right? Probably a clear answer does not exist.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Borrego, C. (1995). (Ed.) Estudos de Impacte Ambiental do Sistema de Tratamento de Residuos Industriais: Componente incineradora e tratamento físico-químico. Institute for Development and Environment, Universidade de Aveiro. (Estarreja, Poceiräo, Setúbal 1, Setúbal 2, Sines).
Douglas, M. and Wildaysky, A. (1982). Risk and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Dunlap, R. and Mertig, A. (1995). Global Environmental Concern: A challenge to the post-materialism thesis. In P. Ester e W. Schluchter (Eds.), Social Dimensions of Contemporary Environmental Issues: International Perspectives. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
Freudenburg, W. & Pastor, S. (1992). NIMBYs and LULUs: Stalking the Syndromes. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 4, 39–61.
Garcia-Marques, L. and Palma-Oliveira, J. (1992). Global Change and the Role of Social Psychology. Paper presented in the International Conference for Innovation in Social Psychology. Lisbon, ISPA.
Marques, J., Palma-Oliveira, J., Marques, J. F., & Ferreira, M. (1995). Sub-group Comparisons. In Levy-Leboyer, C., Bonnes, M., Pawlik, K., Ferreira-Marques, J., & Chase, J. The Psychological and Social Determinants of Environmental Attitudes and Behaviours: International Comparison. EU Project Report: Brussels.
McClelland, Schulze & Hurd, (1990) The effect of risk beliefs on property values: a case study of a hazardous waste site. Risk Analysis, 10, 4, pp. 485–497.
Palma-Oliveira, J. (1992). Stress Ambiental: Um Selectivo Ponto da Situaäo e Modelo Explicativo Revista da Sociedade Portuguesa da Psicologia, 28, 13–77.
Palma-Oliveira, J. (1995). Determinantes da Percepioo de Risco: Dados preliminares. Paper presented in the II Jornadas de Estudo, Desenvolvimento e Cultura da Sociedade Portuguesa de Psicologia. Lisbon: FPCE - UL.
Palma-Oliveira, J. & Jodo, P. (1996). E o Humano? A Psicologia Ambiental na Avaliaäo de Impactes Ambientais. C. Borrego, C. Coelho, L. Arroja, E. Figueredo (Eds.) V’ Confer¨ºncia sobre a Qualidade do Ambiente V. 1 (pp. 183–192). Aveiro:Universidade de Aveiro.
Palma-Oliveira, J. M. & Correia dos Santos, S. (1998). Analise psico-social. Tomo VIII do Estudo de Impacte Ambiental do Projecto de Eliminaçeio Residuos Industriais pelo sector cimenteiro. Lisboa: Scoreco - EcosaÚde.
Palma-Oliveira, J. M. & Coneia dos Santos, S. (1999a). Risk perception in Portugal: The importance of a magic word. L. Goossens, 9th Annual Conference Risk Analysis, Facing the New Millenium (p. 288–301). Delft University Press - Rotterdam.
Palma-Oliveira, J. M., & Correia dos Santos, S. (1999b). Atitudes e comportamentos face à recolha selectiva e locais de deposiäo: estudo de campo. In Santana etal., 6° Conferencia Nacional sobre Qualidade do Ambiente (p. 103–114). UNL.
Palma-Oliveira, J. M., Luisa Lima & Correia dos Santos, S. (1999). Monitorização Psicossocial da Incineradora da Valorsul. 1° relatório. Lisboa: GIS/Valorsul.
Palma-Oliveira, J. M. & Antunes, D. (2001) Estudo Psicossocial de Impacte Ambiental da Central do Ribatejo. Palma-Consultores/Procesl. Lisboa.
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of Risk. Science, 236, 280–285.
Slovic, P. (1999) Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment baterfield.Risk Analysis, 19, 4, pp. 689–710.
Slovic, P., Fischoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. (1979). Rating the risks. Environment, 21, 14–20.
Slovic, P., Fischoff, B. e Lichtenstein, S. (1980). Facts vs. Fears: Understanding perceived risk. In R. Schwing & W. Albers (Eds.) Societal risk assessment: How safe is safe enough?. New York.Plenum.
Slovic, P., Fischoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. (1982). Why study risk perception. Risk Analysis, 2, 2, 83–93.
Slovic, P., Fischoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. (1985). Characterizing Perceived risk. In R. W. Kates, C. Hohenemser & J. Kasperson (Eds.). Perceived risk Boulder, Co. Westview, Press.
van der Pligt, J. (1992) Nuclear energy and the public. Orford: Blackwell.
Visocki, K.(1988). Siting controversial facilities in western Europe: a look at policies and practices contributing to public tolerance. German Marshall Found of the United States.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Palma-Oliveira, J.M. (2001). Ecological Risk Perception: the “Local Universal”?. In: Linkov, I., Palma-Oliveira, J. (eds) Assessment and Management of Environmental Risks. NATO Science Series, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0987-4_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0987-4_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-0024-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0987-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive