期刊文献+

邻避现象原因新析:风险认知与公众信任的视角 被引量:69

Analysis on the Causes of NIMBY in the Perspective of Risk Perception and Public Trust
原文传递
导出
摘要 本文从风险认知切入,对导致公众风险认知偏差的个人特征和风险特征进行了分析,揭示了公众风险认知与专家风险认知的差异;并指出公众和政府或专家的风险认知差异与二者之间的信任关系是相互影响的。在此基础上,进一步分析了风险和信任的关系,提出信任和风险关系的风险认知中介作用模型,指出信任是弥合利益相关者风险认知差异的关键因素。 Risk controversy or even group incidents caused by construction projects can be contributed psychologically to the divergence among the different risk perception of various stakeholders and the resulting trust and behavior choice. In the perspective of risk perception, the paper analyzes the personal characteristics and the risk characteristics which lead to the public cognitive biases, reveals the differences of the risk perception between the public and the specialists, and points out that the differences of the risk perception between the public and the specialists influence the trust between them, and vice versa. On this basis, the paper further analyzes the relationship between trust and risk, designs a new model on trust - risk relationship by using risk perception as the mediator, and puts forward that trust is the key factor to bridge the different risk perception of various stakeholders.
出处 《中国行政管理》 CSSCI 北大核心 2015年第3期131-135,共5页 Chinese Public Administration
基金 国家社科基金重大项目"大型工程的社会稳定风险评估研究"(编号:11&ZD173) 湖南省社会科学基金项目"基于风险认知的邻避工程社会稳定风险化解机制研究"(编号:14YBA020) 湖南省科技厅基金项目"基于湖南经验的重大工程社会稳定风险控制策略研究"(编号:2014sk3215)
关键词 邻避现象 风险认知 认知差异 公众信任 NIMBY, risk perception, perception differences, public trust
  • 相关文献

参考文献15

  • 1[德]乌尔里希·贝克著 何博闻译.风险社会[M].南京:译林出版社,2004..
  • 2Slovic, P. Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 1993.13.
  • 3安东尼·吉登斯.现代性的后果[M].南京:译林出版社,2000.2-3,1,35-36.
  • 4Douglas, M., Wildavsky, A.. Risk and Culture. Berkeley : University of California Press, 1982. pp21 -37.
  • 5翁久惠.嫌恶设施对生活环境品质影响之研究-以台北市内湖、木栅、士林三个垃圾焚化厂为例[D].台湾中兴大学都市计划研究所硕士论文.1994.
  • 6环球网.重化工项目上接头裁决非长久之计[EB/OL].http://opinion.huanqiu.com/editorial/2012-10/3222871.html.
  • 7Krimsky, S. , Plough, A.. Environmental Hazards : Communicating as Asocial Process. Dover, MA : Au- burn House, 1988.
  • 8Tversky, A. , Kahneman, D.. Judgment under uncer- tainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 1974. 185.
  • 9Slovic, P.. Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 1993.13.
  • 10谢晓非,郑蕊.风险沟通与公众理性[J].心理科学进展,2003,11(4):375-381. 被引量:179

二级参考文献9

  • 1Kahneman D, Tversky A. Choices, Values, and Frames. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 17~43
  • 2Slovic P. Perception of Risk. Risk Analysis, 1987, 236 (17): 280-285
  • 3Covello V T, Peters R G, Wojtecki J G, Hyde R C. Risk Communication, the West Nile Virus Epidemic, and Bioterrorism: Responding to the Communication Challenges Posed by the Intentional or Unintentional Release of a Pathogen in an Urban Setting. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 2001, 78 (2): 382~391
  • 4Fischhoff B. Risk perception and communication unplugged: Twenty years of process. Risk Analysis, 1995, 15 (2): 137~144
  • 5Slovic P. Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Analysis, 1999, 19 (4): 689~701
  • 6Kruk G. Risk communications and the management of EMF risks, EMF risk perception and communication. Proceedings International Seminar on EMF Risk Perception and Communication, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 1998. 95~118
  • 7Gray P. Improving EMF risk communication and management: The need for analysis and deliberation, EMF risk perception and communication. Proceedings International Seminar on EMF Risk Perception and Communication, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 1998. 51~68
  • 8Slovic P. Informing and Educating the Public About Risk. Risk Analysis, 1986, 6(4): 403~415
  • 9谢晓非,谢冬梅,郑蕊,张利沙.SARS危机中公众理性特征初探[J].管理评论,2003,15(4):6-12. 被引量:44

共引文献640

同被引文献885

引证文献69

二级引证文献415

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部