Public perception of environmental issues across
socioeconomic characteristics: A survey study in Wujin, China
Public perception of environmental issues across
socioeconomic characteristics: A survey study in Wujin, China
Jun BI,Yongliang ZHANG,Bing ZHANG,
State Key Laboratory
of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, School of Environment, Nanjing
University, Nanjing 210093, China；Center of Environmental
Management & Policy, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China;
Abstract：In developing countries, there is controversy over the correct perception regarding environmental and developmental issues. Few studies have examined the perception of low-income nationals in regards to social and environmental issues. This paper looks at the relationship between socio-demographic factors and the groups’ perceived priority regarding environmental and social issues in Wujin County. The results indicated that most residents, specifically the young, government employed and the urban community consider environmental issues to be serious, especially in relation to air pollution and water pollution. Furthermore, many residents feel it is important to rank environmental problems that are related to other social and economic issues, and that environmental protection must be set as a priority in Wujin County. Compared to social issues, environmental concern was greater among the young, government employed, and the urban community, because of their higher education and affluence. In addition, 66.2% of residents consider environmental protection to be more important than economic development. Thus, environmental protection must be set as a high priority in Wujin County, in order to face the many social and environmental challenges inherent in development.
. Public perception of environmental issues across
socioeconomic characteristics: A survey study in Wujin, China[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 0, (): 361-372.
Jun BI, Yongliang ZHANG, Bing ZHANG, . Public perception of environmental issues across
socioeconomic characteristics: A survey study in Wujin, China. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 0, (): 361-372.
White M J, Hunter L M. Public Perception of Environmental Issues in a Developing Setting. Institute of Behavioral Science, Working Paper(EB2005―0003). 2005
Mitchell J K. Hazard perception studies: Convergent concerns and divergentapproaches during the past decade. In: Saarinen T F, Seamom D, Sell J L, eds. Environmental Perception and Behavior: An Inventory and prospectDepartment of Geography. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1984, 38―39
Curran S, Kumar A, Lutz W, Williams M. Interactionsbetween coastal and marine ecosystems and human population systems:Perspectives on how consumption mediates this interaction. Ambio, 2002, 31: 264―268
National Research Council(NRC). Global Environmental Change: ResearchPathways for the Next Decade. WashingtonDC: National Academies Press, 1999
Dunlap R E. Trends in Public Opinion Toward Environmental Issues:1965―1990. Washington DC: Taylor and Francis, Inc., 1992
Mertig A G, Dunlap R E, Morrison D E. The environmental movementin the United States. In: Dunlap R E, Michelson W, eds. Handbook of EnvironmentalSociology. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002, 448―481
Jacob C T, Azariah J. Environmentalperception of textile industrial pollution in Tiruppur, India. Journal of Asian and International Bioethics, 1997, 7: 162―165
Hunter L M. Household Strategies in the Face of Resource Scarcity:Are They Associated with Development Priorities. Working paper of Institute of Behavioral Science, Research Programon Environment and Behavior, EB2004―0001. 2004
Kempton W M, Boster J S, Hartley J A. Environmental Values in AmericanCulture. Boston: MIT Press, 1995
Stern P C, Dietz T. The value basisof environmental concern. Journal of SocialIssues, 1994, 50: 65―84
Dunlap R E, Mertig A G. Global concern for the environment: Is affluence a prerequisite? Journal of Social Issues, 1995, 51: 121―137
Rinzin C, Vermeulen W J, Glasbergen P. Public perceptions of Bhutan’sapproach to sustainable development in practice. Sustainable Development, 2007, 15: 52―68 doi: 10.1002/sd.293
Inglehart R. Public support for environmental protection: Objectiveproblems and subjective values in 43 societies. Political Science & Politics, 1995, 28: 57―72
Dunlap R E, York R. The globalizationof environmental concern and the limits of the post-materialist valuesexplanation: Evidence from four multi-national surveys. Sociological Quarterly, 2008, 49 (3): 529―563 doi: 10.1111/j.1533-8525.2008.00127.x
Brechin S R, Kempton W. Globalenvironmentalism: A challenge to the poastmaterialsm thesis? Social Science Quarterly, 1994, 75 (2): 245―269
Dunlap R E, Gallup G H, Gallup A. Of global concern: Resultsof the health of the planet survey. Environment, 1993, 35: 33―39
Brechin S. Objective problems, subjective values, and global environmentalism:Evaluating the post-materialist argument and challenging a new explanation. Social Science Quarterly, 1999, 80: 793―811
Jones R E, Dunlap R E. The social bases of environmental concern: Have they changed overtime? Rural Sociology, 1992, 57: 28―47
Klineberg S, McKeever L M, Rothenbach B. Demographic predictors ofenvironmental concern: It does make a difference how it's measured. Social Science Quarterly, 1998, 79 (4): 734―753
Dunlap R E, Xiao C, McCright A M. Measuring endorsement ofthe new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 2001, 56 (3): 425―442 doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00176
Hunter L M, Johnson A, Hatch A. Cross-national gender variationin environmental behaviors. Social ScienceQuarterly, 2004, 85: 677―694 doi: 10.1111/j.0038-4941.2004.00239.x
Zelezny L C, Chua P, Aldrich C.Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 2000, 56: 443―457 doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00177
Fransson N, Garling T. Environmentalconcern: Conceptual definitions, measurement methods, and researchfindings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1999, 19: 369―382 doi: 10.1006/jevp.1999.0141
Biel A, Nilsson A. Religiousvalues and environmental concern: Harmony and detachment. Social Science Quarterly, 2005, 86: 178―191 doi: 10.1111/j.0038-4941.2005.00297.x
High C, Shackleton C M. The comparative value of wild and domestic plants in home gardensof a south african rural village. AgroforestrySystems, 2000, 48 (2): 141―156 doi: 10.1023/A:1006247614579
Twine W, Moshe D, Netshiluvhi T, Siphugu V. Consumption and direct-use values of savanna bio-resourcesused by rural households in Mametja, a semi-arid area of Limpopo Province,South Africa. South African Journal ofScience, 2003, 99 (9): 467―473
Wujin Statistic Bureau. Wujin Statistical Yearbook, 2005 (in Chinese)
Wujin Environmental ProtectionBureau (WEPB). Environmental Quality Reportof Wujin County, 2005 (in Chinese).
Franz X B, Michel W. Environmentalperception of rural and urban pupils. Journalof Environmental Psychology, 1997, 17: 111―122 doi: 10.1006/jevp.1997.0046
Eagly A H, Kulesa P. Attitudes,attitude structure, and resistance to change: Implications for persuasionon environmental issues. In: Bazerman M H, ed. Environment, EtIlice,and Behavior: The Psychology of Environmental Valuation and Degradation. San Francisco: New Lexington Press, 1997
McStay J R, Dunlap R E. Male-female differences in concern for environmental quality. International Journal of Women’s Studies, 1993, 6: 291―301
Momsen J H. Gender differences in environmental concern and perception. The Journal of Geography, 2000, 99: 47―56 doi: 10.1080/00221340008978956
Anderson B A, Romani J H, Phillips H, Wentzel M, Tlabela K. Exploringenvironmental perceptions, behaviors and awareness: Water and waterpollution in South Africa. Population &Environment, 2007, 3 (3): 133―161 doi: 10.1007/s11111-007-0038-5
Brody S D, Highfield W, Alston L. Dose location matter? Measuringenvironmental perceptions of creeks in two San Antonio watersheds. Environment and Behavior, 2004, 36: 229―250 doi: 10.1177/0013916503256900
