Environmental health perceptions in a superfund community

Nagisetty, Raja M.; Autenrieth, Daniel; Storey, Sarah R.; Macgregor, William B.; Brooks, Loran

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110151

Cited by 11 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A previous study [5], developed a survey instrument to measure environmental health perceptions among Butte, MT residents who live in and around the largest Superfund site in the US. The study confirmed the existence of a perception disconnect between official reports of cleanup effectiveness at protecting human health and how residents personally perceive their own environmental health.…”

Section: Community Environmental Health Perceptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With the disconnect between official accounts of environmental health in the Butte, MT Superfund area and residents' environmental health perceptions already established [5], the current study sought to explore if a simple environmental screening intervention could reduce the disconnect. The study's overall goal was to measure what changes (if any) in residents' environmental health perceptions would occur by providing residents with clear, accurate scientific information about Superfund-related environmental conditions in and around their homes.…”

Section: Study Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Public engagement has been challenged by technocratic definitions of contamination, risk, and participation [35]. A previous pilot study [5], identified a disconnect between official agency health risk assessments, and residents' actual mine-waste related environmental health perceptions. This disconnect was evident despite agency efforts at community engagement that have included public notices, public meetings, brochures and fact sheets, periodic interviews with community members, solicited feedback on proposed decision documents (and responses to that feedback).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, another essential criterion for Superfund decision-making at any NPL site is "community acceptance", which requires the Agency to do its best to ensure that the "affected community" has been involved in the process from the beginning and has a reasonable understanding of, and the opportunity to meaningfully contribute to, Agency decision making. Despite the USEPA's recognition as to the importance of community engagement in Superfund communities, and substantial investments to improve communication and engagement with affected communities, an apparent disconnect between public perceptions of their environmental health and official environmental health assessments persists [5].…”

Section: Introduction 1the Role Of the Community In Superfund Decisio...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effects of Residential Environmental Screening and Perception Surveys on Superfund Environmental Health Risk Perceptions

Nagisetty

Macgregor

Hutchins

et al. 2022

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Residents at one of the nation’s largest and longest-operating Superfund sites (Butte, Montana) have expressed environmental health risk perceptions that often diverge from those of EPA and other official stakeholders responsible for the investigation and remediation of site contamination aimed at protecting human health and the environment. A random sample of Butte residents participated in a study of how home-based environmental screening influences environmental health perceptions. Participants completed surveys measuring environmental health perceptions before and after a home site screening of soil and drinking water for lead and arsenic conducted by the research team. Local air monitoring for the same contaminants was also completed during the study period. The home-based screening intervention improved the alignment of subjective participant environmental health perceptions with objective environmental screening measures. Key features of the process that helped achieve this effect included (1) co-locating the collection of participant perceptions and individualized screening measurements; (2) sharing environmental screening results in a clear and unbiased manner; and (3) conducting this work independent of agencies and organizations with direct responsibility for Superfund-related cleanup activities. Empowering residents of a Superfund community with knowledge of the specific kinds and levels of environmental contamination in their home environment may help overcome the gap between agency conclusions regarding environmental health risk and the perceptions of community members.

show abstract

Section: Community Environmental Health Perceptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction 1the Role Of the Community In Superfund Decisio...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of Residential Environmental Screening and Perception Surveys on Superfund Environmental Health Risk Perceptions

Nagisetty

Macgregor

Hutchins

et al. 2022

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, clear preferences for particular forms of remedial response may be expressed, such as contaminant removal based options (e.g., CRC‐Care, 2019; Norrman et al, 2020). Community perceptions of risks and their mitigation may differ markedly from technical expert opinions (Nagisetty et al, 2020). The various community values will need to be reconciled with technical opinions and also the legitimate concerns of other stakeholders (such as the site owner, the regulator, etc.…”

Section: Revised Surf‐uk Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability assessment framework and indicators developed by SuRF‐UK for land remediation option appraisal

Bardos

Thomas

Smith

et al. 2020

Remediation Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scale of land-contamination problems, and of the responses to them, makes achieving sustainability in contaminated land remediation an important objective. The Sustainable Remediation Forum in the UK (SuRF-UK) was established in 2007 to support more sustainable remediation practices in the UK. The prevailing international consensus is that risk assessment is the most rational approach for determining remediation needs and urgency. Sustainability in this context is related to the effective delivery of whatever risk management is necessary to protect human health or the wider environment. SuRF-UK suggests that decisions made at the project planning stage, and also in the choice of remediation approach used to reach particular objectives decided upon, are both opportunities for sustainability gain. In 2011, SuRF-UK issued a set of wide-ranging indicators to support sustainability assessments made during project planning and remediation option appraisal. This advice was reviewed over 2018-2020 and new guidance on process and indicators has been released. Within this guidance, SuRF-UK has provided a checklist of possible sustainability indicators/criteria that can be used to benchmark the scope of sustainability assessment for remediation projects. These indicators are divided into 15 overarching ("headline") categories, divided in a balanced way across the three elements of sustainability: environmental (emissions to air, soil and ground conditions, groundwater and surface water, ecology, and natural resources and waste); social (human health and safety, ethics and equity, neighborhoods and locality, communities and community involvement, and uncertainty and evidence); and economic (direct economic costs and benefits, indirect economic costs and benefits, employment and employment capital, induced economic costs and benefits, and project lifespan and flexibility). The majority of this study explains these categories and their various considerations in more depth and provides the supporting rationale that led to their inclusion in the revised SuRF-UK guidance.

show abstract

Environmental, public health, and economic development perspectives at a Superfund site: A Q methodology approach

Cooper

Wardropper

2021

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental health perceptions in a superfund community

Cited by 11 publications

References 12 publications

Effects of Residential Environmental Screening and Perception Surveys on Superfund Environmental Health Risk Perceptions

Effects of Residential Environmental Screening and Perception Surveys on Superfund Environmental Health Risk Perceptions

Sustainability assessment framework and indicators developed by SuRF‐UK for land remediation option appraisal

Environmental, public health, and economic development perspectives at a Superfund site: A Q methodology approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About