Environmental Risk
Perception
Environmental Risk Perception
o Harmful and long‐lasting consequences for both humans and nature...
o How do people perceive such risks?
a situation, event, or activity, which may lead to uncertain adverse outcomes
affecting something that humans value
an individual’s understanding of the importance and urgency of environmental
protection and the relationship between people and the environment.
Environmental Risk Perception
Environmental risks differ from other risks in a number of ways.
Intricate causal relationships &
1 high complexity and uncertainty
multiple consequences
2 The people who contribute to a risk are not necessarily the ones who suffer
the consequences.
Environmental Risk Perception
1 Rating or rank ordering
an overall judgement by either rating or
rank ordering various risks according to
their overall riskiness or to the degree to
which they experience concern, worry, or
threat concerning these risks.
Environmental Risk Perception
2 ‘Willing to pay’ (WTP)
Trivedi et al. (2015)
Environmental Risk Perception
3 Estimation of subjective probability
«How risky (%) do you think it is to
build a hydroelectric power plant this
neighbourhood?»
Environmental Risk Perception
• Having witnessed an environmental disaster closely (Sjöberg &
Drottz, 1987),
• Living in an area that has been exposed to an environmental
disaster recently (Drottz-Sjöberg & Sjöberg, 1990),
• (Low) level of trust in government agencies and experts (Slovic,
Layman & Flynn, 1991),
• Whether the technological intervention that may harm the
environment is close to the person's living space (Marks and von
Winterfeldt, 1984; Pollock et al. 1992),
• Cognitive Heuristics (shortcuts) (Kahneman, Slovic and Tversky,
1982)…
• are associated with risk perception.
Environmental Risk Perception
• We rarely analyse in detail when
Heuristics are mental shortcuts that can facilitate
making decisions.
problem-solving and probability judgments.
• People often employ heuristics…
We are cognitive misers
«Our brains are built to be intellectually lazy…»
Environmental Risk Perception
Overestimating small frequencies and underestimating larger ones when judging the frequency of various
dangers (Lichtenstein et al. 1978).
Environmental Risk Perception
Two prominent heuristics:
availability heuristic
anchoring‐and‐adjustment heuristic
(Tversky and Kahneman 1974).
Environmental Risk Perception
The availability heuristic occurs when we judge the likelihood of an event based on how easily
we can recall similar events.
Environmental Risk Perception
Bring to mind similar events? Overestimation
Environmental Risk Perception
People believed more in, and had greater concern about, global warming
on days that they perceived to be warmer than usual (Li et al. 2011).
Environmental Risk Perception
People believed more in, and had greater concern about, global warming
on days that they perceived to be warmer than usual (Li et al. 2011).
Environmental Risk Perception
Ensuring that the final
Starting from a robust point of
decision is consistent
reference…
with the initial point.
Joireman, J., Truelove, H. B., & Duell, B. (2010). Effect of outdoor temperature, heat primes and
anchoring on belief in global warming. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 358-367.
Environmental Risk Perception
Joireman, J., Truelove, H. B., & Duell, B. (2010). Effect of outdoor
temperature, heat primes and anchoring on belief in global
warming. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 358-367.
The public is frequently presented with information from the media about the expected rise in global
temperature over the coming years, and these estimates can vary widely. For example, according to the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007), it is estimated that the earth’s temperature will rise
between 2 degrees and 11.5 degrees (Fahrenheit) over the next 90 years.
The low and high ends of this range could serve as important anchors.
Joireman et al. (2010) hypothesized that participants given a high (vs. low) anchor regarding the amount of
temperature increase would report stronger global warming beliefs.
Environmental Risk Perception
Joireman, J., Truelove, H. B., & Duell, B. (2010). Effect of outdoor
temperature, heat primes and anchoring on belief in global
warming. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 358-367.
“Do you believe the earth’s temperature will
low anchor condition rise by exactly 1 degree Fahrenheit over the
next 30 years?”
“Do you believe the earth’s temperature will
high anchor condition rise by exactly 10 degrees Fahrenheit over the
next 30 years?”
“By how many degrees do you think the earth’s
No. temperature will rise (in Fahrenheit) over the next 30
years?”.
Environmental Risk Perception
Joireman, J., Truelove, H. B., & Duell, B. (2010). Effect of outdoor
temperature, heat primes and anchoring on belief in global
warming. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 358-367.
-Higher estimates for the increase in the
Earth’s temperature,
- More likely to believe in global warming
- WTP more to reduce global warming
Environmental Risk Perception
«I am more likely to experience positive events than others…»
«I am less likely to experience negative events than others…»
«Risks of climate change, mobile phones, radioactive waste, and genetically modified
food are smaller for me.» (Costa‐Font et al. 2009).
Costa-Font, J., Mossialos, E., & Rudisill, C. (2009). Optimism and the perceptions of new risks.
Journal of Risk Research, 12(1), 27–41.
Environmental Risk Perception
Outcomes in the far future are less
significant than immediate
outcomes.
Little evidence…
For example, people find an oil spill equally risky whether it may happen in
one month, in one year, or in ten years (Böhm and Pfister 2005).
Scenario
In the oil scenario, a Danish research boat of the renowned institute for ecological research SEASEARCH
discovered in the North Sea either oil barrels on the sea ground (anthropogenic causation in ME- and MEM-Risks)
or natural oil resources that are located just underneath sea ground due to a recent earthquake (natural
causation in EMRisks). As a representative of the institute reports, the oil will dissipate into the sea. The oil will
pollute the sea within a month, one year, or 10 years (time perspective).
Dependent variable measure:
(i) How high would you rate the overall risk of the situation? (very low risk—very high risk);
(ii) How threatening do you find the situation? (not at all threatening—very threatening);
(iii) How dangerous do you find the situation? (not at all dangerous—very dangerous); and
(iv) How probable is it that the situation will lead to harmful consequences? (very unlikely—very likely).
Environmental Risk Perception
High emotional risk when we feel negative,
Low emotional risk when we feel positive.
BUT… Appraisal theories suggest that different specific emotions can have differential impacts on perceived risks
even if they share the same valence (Keller et al. 2012).
For example, fear increases and anger reduces risk perception, even though both are negative (Lerner and Keltner
2001).
Specifically, fear is associated with evaluating situations as uncertain and uncontrollable
In contrast, anger predisposes individuals to evaluate events as highly certain and controllable.
Environmental Risk Perception
Böhm (2003)
Fear, guilt, anger, sadness???
Four types of
emotion
Prospective Retrospective Self-related Other-related
consequence- consequence- ethics-based ethics-based
based emotions based emotions emotions emotions
Fear Sadness Guilt Anger
Böhm (2003) asked respondents to indicate for a list of environmental risks how intensely they
experienced these four emotion types in response to the risks.
Environmental Risk Perception
Environmental Risk Perception
The Cultural Cognition Thesis
Beliefs about societal risks are influenced by the characteristic values of the groups (Kahan et al., 2012).
Individuals interpret scientific evidence in a way that aligns with their prevailing cultural values.
Thus, as with the concept of motivated reasoning, to reach a state of congruence, individuals interpret
scientific evidence in a way that aligns with their prevailing cultural values. People are expected to
process information in a motivated way, that is, consistent with their cultural worldviews (Kahan, 2012).
A key prediction that flows from this theory is that when people are exposed to (new) scientific
information, “culturally” biased cognition will merely reinforce existing predispositions and cause groups
with opposing values to become even more polarized on the respective issue (Kahan, 2010, 2012).
Environmental Risk Perception
The Cultural Cognition Thesis
Cultural theory of risk (Douglas & Wildavsky, 1982)
Beliefs of environmental risks and preferred management strategies to control these risks (Steg and Vlek 2009).
Individuals with fatalistic culture and individualistic culture rate risk lower than those with hierarchical
and egalitarian culture
Risk management strategies Myths of Nature
based on the myths of nature.
Myths of Nature
Awareness of environmental issues is most associated with the
myth of ephemeral nature.
(Steg & Sievers, 2000)
The myth of the ephemeral nature was followed by the
perverse/tolerant nature, the benign nature and the capricious
nature, respectively.
Myths of Nature
Similarly, Schumann (2014) revealed that…
people who have more positive attitudes towards renewable energy sources who
consider technological interventions to nature as risky perceive nature as ephemeral
while
those who view coal consumption more positively adopt the myth of benign nature
more.
Ephemeral nature vs. benign nature
Preferring public transportation, being included in the car pooling system, worrying about
global warming, and general environmental concern (Poortinga, Steg, & Vlek, 2004).
Myths of Nature
Perverse/tolerant
nature myth
government
Political strategy
Free market
Benign Ephemeral
nature myth nature myth
technology Solution strategy behavior
Earthquake Risk
Perception
• Earthquake-vulnerable communities must be educated
• No need to understand the hazard; BUT there is need to believe that the
hazard exists! (Lindell and Perry, 1993)
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Lamjiry & Gifford (2022)
Perceived government responsibility
& Earthquake preparedness
Fatalism
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Lamjiry & Gifford (2022)
How likely is it that an earthquake will occur in Victoria?
How often do you think about the possibility that an
earthquake might occur in Victoria (a town in Romania) in
the future?
Risk perception
When would you estimate thatthe earthquake dubbed the
“Big One” will hit Victoria?
How much doyou believe your life is threatened by
earthquakes?
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Lamjiry & Gifford (2022)
How much responsibility should the government, as
Perceived opposed to each individual, have for protecting people from
governmental loss of life and damage to property from an earthquake?”
responsibility
Local authorities should make every effort to reduce the
consequences of an earthquake
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Lamjiry & Gifford (2022)
If an earthquake is going to harm me, there isn’t much I can do about it
Because I can’t be aware of the exact time of an earthquake, it makes no
Fatalism difference whether I’m ready or not.
I can’t do anything that would be helpful during an earthquake, therefore I
do not plan to prepare.
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Lamjiry & Gifford (2022)
How likely you are to move How likely you are to make acquiring an earth-quake emergency
to a house with updated your residence furniture safer kit
and better building codes? against the occurrence of an
Protective
earthquake? signing up for a first aid course
action How likely you are to move
to a location that is more How likely you are to update sharing their earthquake emergency
likely to be secure in the your house to provincial plan with their neighbours
event of an earthquake? earthquake standards?
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Lamjiry & Gifford (2022)
• Aksa et al. (2020):
Fatalistic attitudes &
earthquake risk perception
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Baytiyeh & Naja (2016)
o Effects of awareness and beliefs on college students’ preparedness for earthquake risks
Three factors of disaster preparedness (DP):
hazard and vulnerability awareness (HVA),
fatalistic beliefs (FB) and
denial beliefs (DB)
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Baytiyeh & Naja (2016)
o Effects of awareness and beliefs on college students’ preparedness for earthquake risks
Three factors of disaster preparedness (DP):
hazard and vulnerability awareness (HVA),
fatalistic beliefs (FB) and
denial beliefs (DB)
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Baytiyeh & Naja (2016)
o Effects of awareness and beliefs on college students’ preparedness for earthquake risks
Three factors of disaster preparedness (DP):
hazard and vulnerability awareness (HVA),
fatalistic beliefs (FB) and
denial beliefs (DB)
Earthquake Risk
Perception
Baytiyeh & Naja (2016)
o Effects of awareness and beliefs on college students’ preparedness for earthquake risks
Three factors of disaster preparedness (DP):
hazard and vulnerability awareness (HVA),
fatalistic beliefs (FB) and
denial beliefs (DB)
• Multiple regression showed that earthquake HVA plays the most important role
• DB and FB have negative effects on DP
Earthquake Risk Lok et al. (2019): Are scientific data or visuals more effective?
Perception
Changing the way that scientific information about risk is
presented…
• People tend to be guided more strongly by their emotional reactions than by
logical analysis.
• Individuals may be unmotivated to take action
Earthquake Risk Lok et al. (2019): Are scientific data or visuals more effective?
Perception
Changing the way that scientific information about risk is
presented…
• 411 participants were shown publicly available statistics or a vivid, scientifically-
grounded image of what a local school would look like after a major earthquake
Earthquake Risk
Perception
77.3%
Sign a petition?
68%