Characteristics of Response to the Cost of Safety Features in the Context of Hazardous Chemical Plant. P. T. Allen, Robens Institute, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
The paper concerns how people make hypothetical trade-offs between cost of additional safety features and risk in the context of a siting decision for hazardous chemical plant in their community. Studies in the UK and in Belgium had the aim of going beyond approaches based on value of life and viewed the public as possible participants in decisions. It was assumed that contextual factors would affect judgments and that different groups or constituencies of interest would judge that issues differently. UK respondents were local authority planning officers and members of the public drawn at random from within a 1 mile radius of two sites in similar areas: a controversial site (a fire two years previously) and a non-controversial site. A third group was drawn from a matched control site with no installation. In Belgium groups were: local politicians; people living within 5 km of a plant who had recently received information about that plant; people living within 5 km of a plant who had received such information some time in the past and a control group. Reported findings include the general pattern of response to the issue of cost versus safety; the characteristics of response to cost compared with other issues and the responses of the various demographic groups. A strong divide was found between those who do and those who do not approve of a cost-safety trade-off. The issue appeared not as an isolated value but rather as part of differing philosophies with respect to industrial development.
Work supported by European Commission, contract EV5V-CT92-0071.