Research on public ecological environment risk information acquisition in large coal-fired power base development
-
摘要: 生态环境风险信息获取与沟通可有效缓解煤电基地生态环境破坏引起的社会风险，本文依据风险信息寻求与加工模型(RISP)，对锡林浩特煤电基地周围社会公众进行问卷调查，定量分析煤电基地开发过程中生态环境风险信息获取情况与偏好。结果表明：公众对煤电基地生态环境风险信息获取较不充分概率高达51.5 %; 互联网作为获取风险信息来源受53.4 % 的公众青睐，公众对各渠道生态环境风险信息表示信任概率高达50 %，且带有数据的生态环境风险信息可将不信任概率明显降低至14.6 %; 牧民的风险信息获取充分性和获取能力相对较低，风险信息获取渠道传统且单一，提高牧民受教育程度与收入可有效提高信息获取充分性并丰富风险信息获取渠道; 对比政府保护政策，受访者对企业种植植被、围栏封育等直接有效且效果明显的生态环境保护措施更加满意。建议煤电基地开发全过程建立公众参与机制，多渠道加强风险教育并长效实施风险信息沟通。Abstract: The acquisition and communication of ecological and environmental risk information can effectively mitigate the social risks caused by ecological and environmental damage in coal power base.According to the risk information seeking and processing model (RISP), a questionnaire survey was conducted on the social population around Xilinhaote coal power base.The acquisition and preference of ecological risk information during the development of coal-fired power bases was quantitatively analyzed.The results show the following four points: The probability of inadequate access to eco-environmental risk information of coal-fired power base is as high as 51.5 %.The Internet as a source of risk information is favored by 53.4 % of the public, and the probability of public expressing trust in eco-environmental risk information of various channels is as high as 50 %, and the probability of distrust in eco-environmental risk information with data is significantly reduced to 14.6 %.Herdsmen's adequacy and ability of risk information acquisition are relatively low, and the risk information acquisition channel is traditional and single.Improving residents' educational level can effectively improve the adequacy of information acquisition and enrich the access to risk information.Compared with protection policies, the respondents are in favor of eco-environmental protection measures, such as vegetation planting, enclosure, etc.which are carried out in a direct and effective way.It is suggested that that the mechanism of public participation targeted at the social groups be established, risk education through various channels be enhanced and long-term information communication mechanism be implemented during the whole process of the development in coal and electricity bases.
-
Key words:
- coal-fired power base /
- ecological security /
- risk /
- information communication
-
图 8 企业生态环境保护措施公众满意度
Figure 8. Public satisfaction with eco-environmental protection measures of enterprises
图 9 政府生态环境保护政策公众满意度
Figure 9. Public satisfaction with eco-environmental protection measures of government
表 1 变量的确定与答案的量化
Table 1. Variable determination and quantification of answers
序号 潜在变量 观测变量 观测变量对应题项 题项答案量化形式 1 生态环境风险信息获取充分性 自身现有风险信息量 关于露天煤矿对生态环境(健康/收入)产生的影响，您认为您所知道的知识有多少 1—不知道任何相关知识
2—知道较少相关知识
3—知道中等相关知识
4—知道较多相关知识
5—知道所有相关知识风险信息获取充分阈值 您认为您需要获得多少相关知识，才能应对露天煤矿对生态环境(健康/收入)的影响 2 感知生态环境风险信息收集能力 风险信息获取途径明确度 关于露天煤矿对生态环境(健康/收入)产生的影响，知道从哪里去获得更多的信息 1—非常不同意
2—不同意
3—既不同意也不反对
4—同意
5—非常同意有用风险信息获取容易度 关于露天煤矿对生态环境(健康/收入)产生的影响，对我来说，很难获得有用的信息 3 相关渠道信念 信息来源渠道 您了解露天煤矿负面印象的主要信息来源是什么 1—政府通知
2—报纸
3—电视和广播
4—互联网
5—邻居朋友
6—其他风险信息信任 当在多种渠道看到相关信息时，我更愿意相信这个信息/我更愿意相信有数据的信息 1—非常不同意
2—不同意
3—既不同意也不反对
4—同意
5—非常同意4 生态环境保护措施满意度 煤矿公司措施 您认为煤矿公司采取的下列生态环境保护措施是否有效 1—没有任何效果
2—效果较差
3—效果一般
4—效果较好
5—效果完美当地政府措施 您认为当地政府采取的下列生态环境保护措施是否有效 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 量表信度分析
Table 2. Reliability analysis
数据可靠性 整体 公众信息维度 信息获取充分性 信息收集能力 相关渠道信念 环保措施满意度 系数 0.949 0.751 0.895 0.872 0.726 0.942
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 受访者基本信息
Table 3. Individual characteristics of interviewees
序号 类别 变量 频次 频率/% 1 年龄 18~28 38 18.4 29~38 66 32.0 39~48 59 28.7 49~58 28 13.6 58以上 15 7.3 2 性别 男 109 52.9 女 97 47.1 3 民族 汉 149 72.3 蒙 55 26.7 满 2 1.0 4 教育背景 未受教育 3 1.5 小学 17 8.3 初中 42 20.4 高中 47 22.8 大学 90 43.6 硕士及以上 7 3.4 5 就业状态 放牧 39 18.9 矿业 50 24.3 其他 117 56.8 6 家庭人均年收入/万元 2以下 40 19.3 2~4 58 28.2 4~6 51 24.8 6~8 30 14.6 8以上 27 13.1 7 本地居住时间/年 10以下 61 29.6 11~20 28 13.6 21~30 34 16.5 31~40 28 13.6 41~50 35 17.0 50以上 20 9.7 8 距离露天煤矿最近距离/km 0~3 73 35.4 4~7 85 41.2 8~11 32 15.5 12~15 10 4.9 15以上 6 3.0
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 生态环境风险信息获取的影响因素
Table 4. Factors influencing the acquisition of ecological environmental risk information
年龄 性别 民族 教育背景 就业状态 人均年收入 居住时长 最近距离 生态环境信息充分性 -0.165
**-0.153
**— 0.180
***0.236
***0.235
***-0.110
*-0.128
**生态环境信息收集能力 -0.132
**— — 0.133
**0.206
***— -0.158
**— 注：*表示P < 0.1;**表示P < 0.05;***表示P < 0.01。
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 风险信息来源与个人特征相关系数与显著水平
Table 5. Correlation coefficient and significance level between risk information sources and personal characteristics
年龄 性别 民族 教育背景 就业状态 人均年收入 居住时长 最近距离 政府通知 — — — 0.128
**— — — — 报纸 — — -0.113
*— 0.160
**— — -0.110
*电视与广播 -0.127
**— — — 0.189
***— — — 互联网 -0.326
***— — 0.247
***0.197
***0.191
***-0.269
***— 邻居与朋友 — 0.170
***— -0.159
**-0.118
**-0.124
**0.131
**— 其他 — -0.151
**— -0.104
*-0.185
***— — — 注：*表示P < 0.1;**表示P < 0.05;***表示P < 0.01。
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 邹祎萍, 娄满君, 么琳颖, 等. 燃煤电厂土壤中多环芳烃污染特征及其源解析[J]. 矿业科学学报, 2019, 4(2): 170-178. http://kykxxb.cumtb.edu.cn/CN/abstract/abstract211.shtmlZou Yiping, Lou Manjun, Yao Linying, et al. Pollution characteristics and source analysis of pahs in soil of coal-fired power plants[J]. Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 2019, 4(2): 170-178. http://kykxxb.cumtb.edu.cn/CN/abstract/abstract211.shtml [2] 崔芳鹏, 武强, 林元惠, 等. 中国煤矿水害综合防治技术与方法研究[J]. 矿业科学学报, 2018, 3(3): 219-228. http://kykxxb.cumtb.edu.cn/CN/abstract/abstract141.shtmlCui Fangpeng, Wu Qiang, Lin Yuanhui, et al. Research on comprehensive prevention and control technology and methods of coal mine water disasters in china[J]. Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 2018, 3(3): 219-228. http://kykxxb.cumtb.edu.cn/CN/abstract/abstract141.shtml [3] 刘锴. 贫困区居民应对土地退化及其修复的行为研究[D]. 北京: 清华大学, 2018. [4] 夏光. 中国生态环境风险及应对策略[J]. 经济全局, 2015(1): 46-50. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JJBG201501015.htmXia Guang. Eco-environmental risks and countermeasures in China[J]. Economy Outlook, 2015(1): 46-50. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JJBG201501015.htm [5] 宋娴, 金莺莲. 风险信息寻求和加工模型在科学传播领域的应用——以转基因食品安全问题为例[J]. 科普研究, 2018, 13(2): 5-11. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KUYT201802002.htmSong Xian, Jin Yinglian. The application of RISP model in science communication: in the case of GM food as an example[J]. Studies on Science Popularization, 2018, 13(2): 5-11. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KUYT201802002.htm [6] Pidgeon N.Risk communication and the social amplification of risk: theory, evidence and policy implications[J]. Risk, Decision and Policy, 1999, 4(2): 145-159. doi: 10.1080/135753099348049 [7] Hou D E, Liu K.Farmers'perception and adaptation behavior concerning land degradation: A theoretical framework and a case study in northwest China[C]. EGU General Assembly, 2017. [8] Bubela T, Nisbet M C, Borchelt R, et al. Science communication reconsidered[J]. Nature Biotechnology, 2009, 27: 514. doi: 10.1038/nbt0609-514 [9] 曾静. 核电项目建设情景下公众的风险应对行为与信息沟通研究[D]. 合肥: 中国科学技术大学, 2017. [10] 张宏, 柏益尧, 左玉辉. 关于生态社会公平性建设的思考——以南京为例[J]. 生态经济, 2005(4): 32-35. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-STJJ200504006.htmZhang Hong, Bo Yiyao, Zuo Yuhui. Thinking about construct of a just eco-society: in the case of Nanjing[J]. Ecological Economy, 2005(4): 32-35. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-STJJ200504006.htm [11] 王文卓. 环境风险决策中的公众参与权研究[J]. 金陵法律评论, 2016(1): 118-135. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JLFL201601010.htmWang Wenzhuo. Research on public participation right in environmental risk decision-making[J]. Jin Ling Law Review, 2016(1): 118-135. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JLFL201601010.htm [12] 甄瑞, 周宵. 新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情下普通民众焦虑的影响因素研究[J]. 社会心理学, 2020, 26(2): 99-107. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXNX202002001.htmZhen Rui, Zhou Xiao. Research on the influence factors of the general public anxiety under the novel coronavirus pneumonia epidemic situation[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology, 2020, 26(2): 99-107. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXNX202002001.htm [13] 李莎莎. 防灾韧性城市建设下的灾害风险沟通研究[J]. 北京规划建设, 2018(2): 22-26. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHJS201802006.htmLi Shaaha. Research on disaster risk communication under disaster prevention resilience city construction[J]. Beijing Planning Review, 2018(2): 22-26. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHJS201802006.htm [14] 薛淑琴. 2017年气候对锡林郭勒盟主要行业影响分析[J]. 现代农业, 2018(7): 112. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XDNY201807080.htmXue Shuqin. Analysis of the influence of climate on main industries in Xilingol League in 2017[J]. Modern Agriculture, 2018(7): 112. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XDNY201807080.htm [15] 解智琨, 张萌. 基于煤电资源开发的农牧交错区生态系统服务演变特征[J]. 中国矿业大学学报, 2018, 47(2): 436-442. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGKD201802025.htmJie Zhikun, Zhang meng. Dynamic change regularity of ecosystem services in northern agro-pastoral ecoton with development of coal industry and coal-fired power generation[J]. Journal of China University of Mining & Technolog, 2018, 47(2): 436-442. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGKD201802025.htm [16] Griffin R, Yang Z J, Huurne E, et al. After the flood: Anger, attribution, and the seeking of information[C]. Presented to the Science Communication Interest Group(top faculty paper).Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, annual convention. San Francisco, CA.August 2006. [17] 刘婧, 伍麟. 从风险信息到自我认同: RISP模型的范式演变[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2016, 4(7): 434-443. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XLJS201607010.htmLiu Jing, Wu Lin. From risk information to self-identity: The paradigm evolution of RISP model[J]. Psychology: Techniques and Applications, 2016, 4(7): 434-443. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XLJS201607010.htm [18] Kahlor L.An augmented risk information seeking model: the case of Global warming[J]. Media Psycholog, 2007, 10(3): 414-435. doi: 10.1080/15213260701532971 [19] Cross M, Heeren A, Cornicelli L J, et al. Bovine tuberculosis management in Northwest Minnesota and implications of the risk information seeking and processing(RISP)model for wildlife disease management[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2018, 5: 190. http://www.researchgate.net/publication/327084787_Bovine_Tuberculosis_Management_in_Northwest_Minnesota_and_Implications_of_the_Risk_Information_Seeking_and_Processing_RISP_Model_for_Wildlife_Disease_Management [20] Yang Z J, Rickard L N, Harrison T M, et al. Applying the risk information seeking and processing model to examine support for climate change mitigation policy[J]. Science Communication, 2014, 36(3): 296-324. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/sageus/10755470/2014/00000036/00000003/art00003 [21] Griffin R J, Dunwoody S, Neuwirth K.Proposed model of the relationship of risk information seeking and processing to the development of preventive behaviors[J]. Environmental Research, 1999, 80(2): 230-245. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935198939408 [22] 邢梦林, 王潇磊, 刘奕尧, 等. 河南省典型污染河流水环境现状评价及相关性分析[J]. 干旱环境监测, 2017, 31(3): 97-101. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHJC201703001.htmXing Menglin, Wang Xiaolei, Liu Yiyao, et al. The status evaluation and correlation analysis of typical polluted river in Henan province[J]. Arid Environmental Monitoring, 2017, 31(3): 97-101. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHJC201703001.htm [23] 宁德市生态环境保护公众参与保障办法(试行)[N]. 闽东日报, 2018-08-30(2). [24] 宋曦, 丁文梅, 宁云才, 等. 煤矿安全生产管理体系优化研究——以陕西某煤矿为例[J]. 矿业科学学报, 2019, 4(2): 187-194. http://kykxxb.cumtb.edu.cn/CN/abstract/abstract213.shtmlSong Xi, Ding Wenmei, Ning Yuncai, et al. Research on the optimization of coal mine safety production management system: a case study of a coal mine in shaanxi province[J]. Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 2019, 4(2): 187-194. http://kykxxb.cumtb.edu.cn/CN/abstract/abstract213.shtml [25] Clarke C.Seeking and processing information about zoonotic disease risk: a proposed framework[J]. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2009, 14(5): 314-325. http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/20103000234.html [26] Wynne B.Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science-Hitting the notes, but missing the music[J]. Public Health Genomics, 2006, 9(3): 211-220. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/servlet/linkout?suffix=b22&dbid=16&doi=10.1108%2FIJSSP-03-2012-0022&key=10.1159%2F000092659 [27] 刘锴, 宋易南, 侯德义. 污染地块修复的社会可持续性与公众知情研究[J]. 环境保护, 2018, 46(9): 37-42. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HJBU201809011.htmLiu Kai, Song Yinan, Hou Deyi. Social sustainability of contaminated site remediation and public awareness[J]. Environmental Protection, 2018, 46(9): 37-42. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HJBU201809011.htm [28] Harclerode M A, Lal P, Vedwan N, et al. Evaluation of the role of risk perception in stakeholder engagement to prevent lead exposure in an urban setting[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2016, 184: 132-142. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479716304820 [29] Steg L, Gifford R.Sustainable transportation and quality of life[J]. Journal of Transport Geography, 2005, 13(1): 59-69. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692304000870 [30] Li X, Chen W, Cundy A B, et al. Analysis of influencing factors on public perception in contaminated site management: Simulation by structural equation modeling at four sites in China[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2018, 210: 299-306. -
点击查看大图
图(9) / 表(5)
计量
- 文章访问数: 540
- HTML全文浏览量: 210
- PDF下载量: 12
- 被引次数: 0