Premium
Risk Perception and Social Acceptability of Technologies: The French Case
Author(s) -
Bastide Sophie,
Moatti JeanPaul,
Pages JeanPierre,
Fagnani Francis
Publication year - 1989
Publication title -
risk analysis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.972
H-Index - 130
eISSN - 1539-6924
pISSN - 0272-4332
DOI - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1989.tb01242.x
Subject(s) - risk perception , feeling , perception , socioeconomic status , public opinion , context (archaeology) , social psychology , population , public health , risk aversion (psychology) , psychology , environmental health , business , actuarial science , medicine , economics , political science , geography , politics , expected utility hypothesis , financial economics , nursing , archaeology , neuroscience , law
The authors present results of a February 1987 survey on judged frequency of mortality causes and risk perception of technologies in a representative sample of the French population. Although the French context is very different, and the impact of public controversies have been very limited on technological choices such as the nuclear energy program, strong similarities in risk perception of technologies are observed with results from U.S. surveys. Results, which could be worthwhile for other countries, suggest that risk perception is influenced by two different types of components. The first influence is the global feeling of “security” that society procures to its members. Such feeling depends on the individual's socioeconomic status, subjective state of health, and personal discomfort in daily life, and explains individual aversion to risk independently of the mortality causes or technologies involved. The second influence is the degree of perceived social legitimization of the activities involving risks. Risks of medical and transportation activities are strongly opposed to illegitimate risky behaviors (smoking, drugs, alcohol); technologies which have been an object of public debate (nuclear plants, the chemical industry, lead in gasoline) have an intermediate position reflecting the remaining uncertainties of public opinion about their risk–benefit balancing. Tentative conclusions for risk communication are proposed.