Risk perception and worry in environmental decision-making – a case study within the Swedish steel industry
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12598165 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Stina Alriksson (0000-0003-0702-0306, Department of Biology and Environmental Science, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden, corresponding author), Monika Filipsson (0009-0002-6461-7969) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue | 9 |
| Pages | 1173-1194 |
| Publication date | 2016-03-03 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Risk Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1366-9877 • E-ISSN: 1466-4461 |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/13669877.2016.1153498 |
| OpenAlex | W248368086 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 32 |
Sustainable development is an important issue for the industry in order to fulfil legislation requirements and to be able to use green marketing as a competitive advantage. The Swedish steel industry has implemented a large number of environmental improvements, for example, within energy efficiency, raw materials and recyclability. Technical improvements can help the industry decrease its environmental impact; however, in order to reach sustainable development, more factors need to be considered: an effective environmental decision-making process, for example. This process may be influenced by personal factors such as risk perception and worry, which are factors that will not contribute to an effective decision-making process. The aim of this study was to investigate if personal worry and risk perception influenced environmental decision-making within the Swedish steel industry. Thirty-eight interviews were performed at 10 Swedish steelworks using the Q-methodology. The major perceived environmental risks with the facility and personal worry were assessed, compared to the day-to-day work. It was concluded that the major perceived risks were emissions of carbon dioxide, use of non-renewable energy and emissions of particulate matter. The decision-makers were mainly worried about emissions of carbon dioxide, emissions of dioxin and use of non-renewable energy. The environmental issues that were prioritised in practice (day-to-day work) were emissions of carbon dioxide, emissions of particulate matter and emissions of metals. Even though emissions of carbon dioxide were given the highest priority in the Q-sorts, there was in general no clear relationship between risk perception and personal worry with the prioritised environmental issues at the steelworks. The quantitative analysis of the Q-sorts and the qualitative interviews both showed that the day-to-day work was unaffected by personal worry and risk
Business · Economics · Environmental economics · Perception · Political science · Renewable energy · Risk perception · Sustainable development · Work (physics · Worry · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Engineering · Environmental Education and Sustainability · Psychology · Risk Perception and Management
Doing Q Methodological Research
Gender Differences in Risk Perception
Gender and Environmental Risk Concerns
Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science
Worry and Risk Perception
Sustainable development in four Swedish communities priorities, responsibility, empowerment
Comparative studies of risk perception
Some Pitfalls of an Overemphasis on Science in Environmental Risk Management Decisions
Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change
Uncertain climate
Gender-specific reactions to environmental hazards in the Netherlands
Managerial Perceptions and the Production of Fire Protection
Facing Technological Risks
Gender differences in risk taking
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2024 - 2024 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |