Why would anyone object? An exploration of social aspects of phytoremediation acceptability

被引:20
作者
Wolfe, AK [1 ]
Bjornstad, DJ [1 ]
机构
[1] Oak Ridge Natl Lab, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 USA
关键词
phytoremediation; contamination; technology acceptability; decision making;
D O I
10.1080/0735-260291044304
中图分类号
Q94 [植物学];
学科分类号
071001 ;
摘要
Phytoremediation comprises a suite of promising cleanup technologies that use plants to remove or contain contaminants in soil and water. To be deployed, phytoremediation must be both technically and socially acceptable. This article explores the potential social acceptability of phytoremediation options proposed for use at specific sites and describes the conceptual framework that guides our exploration. The framework, called PACT (Public Acceptability of Controversial Technologies), consists of Dialog, Technology, Constituent, and Context dimensions. It posits that remediation. decision making is a social process informed by scientific and technical information, rather than a science- or technology-driven process. Although empirical data are scarce, applying PACT shows that a number of issues have the potential to impose conditions on the social acceptability of phytoremediation, and that some issues could lead to outright rejection. Further, because many of these issues concern values and goals, they cannot be resolved simply by providing better or more detailed technical information about phytoremediation. PACT is instructive in showing how even seemingly benign or desirable technologies such as phytoremediation have the potential to generate public controversy, delineating issues in ways that can help lead to their resolution.
引用
收藏
页码:429 / 438
页数:10
相关论文
共 34 条
[11]   INDUCING CHANGE IN VALUES, ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIORS - BELIEF SYSTEM-THEORY AND THE METHOD OF VALUE SELF-CONFRONTATION [J].
GRUBE, JW ;
MAYTON, DM ;
BALLROKEACH, SJ .
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES, 1994, 50 (04) :153-173
[12]   Issues in agricultural and environmental biotechnology: Identifying and comparing biotechnology issues from public opinion surveys, the popular press and technical/regulatory sources [J].
Hagedorn, C ;
AllenderHagedorn, S .
PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE, 1997, 6 (03) :233-245
[13]   THE NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF BIOTECHNOLOGY [J].
HAGEDORN, SA .
BULLETIN OF SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY, 1994, 14 (01) :24-27
[14]   DIMENSIONS OF RISK [J].
HANSSON, SO .
RISK ANALYSIS, 1989, 9 (01) :107-112
[15]  
HOBAN T, 1992, RURAL SOCIOL, V57, P476, DOI 10.1111/j.1549-0831.1992.tb00474.x
[16]   THE SOCIAL AMPLIFICATION OF RISK - A CONCEPTUAL-FRAMEWORK [J].
KASPERSON, RE ;
RENN, O ;
SLOVIC, P ;
BROWN, HS ;
EMEL, J ;
GOBLE, R ;
KASPERSON, JX ;
RATICK, S .
RISK ANALYSIS, 1988, 8 (02) :177-187
[17]  
Keeney R.L., 1992, VALUE FOCUSED THINKI
[18]  
KEMP R, 1992, FEMS SYMP, V63, P99
[19]  
Kempton Willett., 1995, ENV VALUES AM CULTUR
[20]  
KERCHNER ND, 2001, 0004 JIEE