4.7 Article

Well water testing in African-American communities without municipal infrastructure: Beliefs driving decisions

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 686, 期 -, 页码 1220-1228

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.317

关键词

Drinking water; Risk communication; Mental models; Environmental justice; Private wells

资金

  1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science to Achieve Results program [83927901]
  2. North Carolina Policy Collaboratory [KNCPC-12001]
  3. North Carolina Water Resources Research Institute-Sea Grant [7-05-W]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Some peri-urban African-American communities in North Carolina remain excluded from nearby municipal water service, forcing them to rely on unregulated private wells. Despite evidence of elevated drinking water contamination risks in these communities, water monitoring is rare. To identify factors influencing decisions to test private wells, we developed and administered a survey to residents of affected areas. A factor analysis identified three constructs significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of water testing: (1) the misconception that contaminants can be detected by sensory perception, (2) concerns about costs of testing and/or water treatment, and (3) not knowing how to get a water test or having time to do so. Increased knowledge about how to test and the importance of testing was significantly associated with a decreased concern about costs which, in turn, was significantly associated with an increased odds of testing. These results suggest the need for targeted risk communications that correct the misperception that contaminants can be tasted, smelled, or seen. The results also suggest the need for clear information about how to get a water test and for low-cost testing programs. Increased monitoring could empower residents to take protective actions and potentially mobilize political support for water service extensions. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据