Public meetings about local waste management problems: comparing participants to nonparticipants.

One of the more traditional ways to involve citizens in environmental management in the United States is to hold a public meeting. Yet public meetings are also frequently criticized for stereotypical weaknesses, including a concern that citizens who attend public meetings do not accurately represent citizens who do not attend. To examine this concern in the context of local waste management problems, this study investigates whether citizens who attend public meetings differ from citizens who do not attend meetings. In the spring of 1998, residents in two New York communities facing local waste management problems received mailed questionnaires. Those surveyed included citizens who had previously attended state-sponsored public meetings about the waste sites and citizens who lived within one mile of the respective waste sites but had not attended any meetings. A comparison of demographic characteristics showed that, in both communities, citizens who attended meetings tended to report higher incomes and have children living at home. In one community, previous meeting participants tended to perceive greater risks from the waste site. In both communities, participants were less likely to consider certain sources of information about the waste sites, including the state environmental agency, state health agency, and the industries, as credible. Regardless of whether they had previously attended public meetings, respondents who perceived the risks as greater also perceived the sources as less credible. The conclusions suggest some potential challenges to effective communication at public meetings, including overcoming widespread skepticism and heightened concern among audience members.