Literature DB >> 22661016

Social approval of the community assessment model for odor dispersal: results from a citizen survey.

John C Tyndall1, Nancy Grudens-Schuck, Jay D Harmon, Steve J Hoff.   

Abstract

Odors emitted from US Midwest hog production facilities present farmers, residents, and state regulatory agencies with a set of complex challenges. To predict odor exposure from multiple swine production sources simultaneously, and to determine siting recommendations for proposed new or enlarged hog facilities, researchers at Iowa State University designed the community assessment model for odor dispersion (CAM). A three-county citizen survey conducted in Iowa examined the level of hypothetical social acceptance of the modeling process, and level of trust in CAM results. While 69 % of respondents approved of modeling as a way to determine the most socially appropriate location for production sites, only 35 % would trust the results if potential odor exposure from a new facility were proposed to be built near their home. We analyzed approval of the CAM model, and level of trust, across a number of demographic, attitudinal, and belief factors regarding environmental quality and the hog industry. Overall, trust in CAM was uneven and varied across respondents. Those residents who would not trust CAM tended to be more concerned with environmental quality and less inclined to believe that the hog industry is critically important economically. Those who would not trust CAM results also had significantly more direct experience with odors. Findings point to predominantly positive, yet equivocal acceptance of CAM results among the citizenry, which is not unexpected given conflict typical of siting decisions in industry and waste disposal arenas. Recommendations are offered regarding the interaction of trust, beliefs and attitudes and the utility of CAM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22661016     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-012-9879-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  7 in total

1.  Assessing public perceptions of computer-based models.

Authors:  Kristan Cockerill; Vincent Tidwell; Howard Passell
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Reaction of the local public to large-scale swine facilities.

Authors:  A E Reisner; F Taheripour
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2007-02-26       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 3.  Nuisance concerns and odor control.

Authors:  J R Miner
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 4.034

Review 4.  Livestock odors: implications for human health and well-being.

Authors:  S S Schiffman
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 5.  Sustainability issues of U.S. swine production.

Authors:  M S Honeyman
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Environmental health impacts of concentrated animal feeding operations: anticipating hazards--searching for solutions.

Authors:  Peter S Thorne
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2006-11-14       Impact factor: 9.031

7.  Community health and socioeconomic issues surrounding concentrated animal feeding operations.

Authors:  Kelley J Donham; Steven Wing; David Osterberg; Jan L Flora; Carol Hodne; Kendall M Thu; Peter S Thorne
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2006-11-14       Impact factor: 9.031

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.