PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF RISK AND ACCEPTABILITY OF FOREST VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO

Citation
Rg. Wagner et al., PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF RISK AND ACCEPTABILITY OF FOREST VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO, Forestry Chronicle, 74(5), 1998, pp. 720-727
Citations number
34
Categorie Soggetti
Forestry
Journal title
ISSN journal
00157546
Volume
74
Issue
5
Year of publication
1998
Pages
720 - 727
Database
ISI
SICI code
0015-7546(1998)74:5<720:PPORAA>2.0.ZU;2-Q
Abstract
We examined public perceptions of risk and acceptability for 9 alterna tives to controlling forest vegetation in Ontario (N = 2,301) in the f all of 1994. The proportion of respondents indicating whether an alter native was 1) difficult to control, 2) potentially catastrophic, 3) a problem for future generations, and 4) a personal worry determined per ceptions of risk for each vegetation management alternative. Ranking o f alternatives from highest to lowest perceived risk was: aerially-app lied herbicides > biological control > ground-applied herbicides > mul ches > prescribed fire > heavy equipment > cover cropping > manual cut ting > grazing animals. Public acceptance was lowest for serially-appl ied herbicides (18%) followed by ground-applied herbicides (37%), biol ogical control (57%), prescribed fire (57%), mulches (65%), heavy equi pment (72%), cover cropping (80%), grazing animals (82%), and manual c utting (89%). Public acceptability of various agents for biological co ntrol differed depending on the proposed agent. Natural plant toxins w ere viewed as most acceptable (73%) followed by microorganims (42%), g enetically-engineered organisms (39%), and viruses (21%). We found a s trong correlation between a risk perception index and acceptability of the alternatives for the general public (r(2) = 0.84) and those in ti mber-dependent communities (r(2) = 0.89). Our results suggest that str onger public support can probably be achieved for forest vegetation ma nagement programs that include non-herbicide alternatives.