1 |
Slovic P, Flynn JH, Layman M. Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. Science 1991;254(5038):1603-1607.
DOI
|
2 |
DiMento JF, Graymer L, editors. Confronting regional challenges: approaches to LULUs, growth, and other vexing governance problems: the Sixth Annual Donald G. Hagman Commemorative Conference. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy; 1991.
|
3 |
Freudenburg WR, Pastor SK. NIMBYs and LULUs: stalking the syndromes. J Soc Issues 1992;48(4):39-61.
DOI
|
4 |
Schively C. Understanding the NIMBY and LULU phenomena: reassessing our knowledge base and informing future research. J Plan Lit 2007;21(3):255-266.
DOI
ScienceOn
|
5 |
Jeong HS, Lee SW. A study on the development of green movement and its policy impacts in Korea. J Environ Policy Admin 1994;2(1): 85-101 (Korean).
|
6 |
Pedhazur EJ, Schmelkin LP. Measurement, design, and analysis: an integrated approach. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1991, p, 277-303.
|
7 |
Babbie ER. Survey research methods. Belmont: Wadworth Pub.; 1998, p. 97-98.
|
8 |
Mayer FS, Frantz CM. The connectedness to nature scale: a measure of individuals' feeling in community with nature. J Environ Psychol 2004;24(4):503-515.
DOI
ScienceOn
|
9 |
Leopold A. A Sand County Almanac: with essays on conservation from Round River. New York: Ballantine Books; 1949.
|
10 |
Sasidharan V, Thapa B. Ethnicity and variations in wildlife concern: exploring the socio-structural and sociopsychological bases of wildlife values; 2004 [cited 2014 Sep 3]. Available from: http://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/pubs/snr07043j.pdf.
|
11 |
Renn O, Rohrmann B. Cross-cultural risk perception: a survey of empirical studies. Boston: Kluwer; 2000, p. 105-143.
|
12 |
Pidgeon NF, Kasperson RE, Slovic P. The social amplification of risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003, p. 5.
|
13 |
Hahm, MI, Kwon HJ, Lee HY, Park HG, Lee SG. Differences of experts and non-experts in perceiving environmental and technological risks. J Envrion Health Sci 2009;35(4):269-277 (Korean).
|
14 |
Park CY, Chang EA, Shin DC, Lim YW, Choi WH. Related factors of environmental risk perception among general public and experts. Korean J Environ Toxicol 2001;16(2):85-95 (Korean).
|
15 |
Douglas M, Wildavsky AB. Risk and culture: an essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1982, p. 194.
|
16 |
Burgman BA. Risks and decisions for conservation and environmental management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005, p. 452.
|
17 |
Park S. Social and cultural aspects of dioxin risk: factors influencing variation in perception of risk and responsibility in Jeonju City, Korea [dissertation]. Syracuse: State University of New York; 2008.
|
18 |
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Polychlorinated dibenzo-para-dioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans: IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Lyon: IARC Press; 1997, p. 9-27.
|
19 |
Kogevinas M. Human health effects of dioxins: cancer, reproductive and endocrine system effects. Hum Reprod Update 2001;7(3):331-339.
DOI
ScienceOn
|
20 |
Kasperson RE. The social amplification of risk: progress in developing an integrative framework. In: Krimsky S, Golding D, editors. Social theories of risk. Westport: Praeger; 1992, p. 153-178.
|
21 |
Rohrmann B. Cross-cultural studies on the perception and evaluation of hazards. In: Renn O, Rohrmann B, editors. Cross-cultural risk perception: a survey of empirical studies. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 2000, p. 103-143.
|
22 |
Halfmann J. Community and life-chances: risk movements in the United States and Germany. Environ Values 1999;8(2):177-197.
DOI
|
23 |
Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science 1987;236(4799):280-285.
DOI
|
24 |
Taylor-Gooby P, Zinn JO. Current directions in risk research: new developments in psychology and sociology. Risk Anal 2006;26(2): 397-411.
DOI
ScienceOn
|
25 |
Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichetenstein S. Characterizing perceived risk. In: Kates RW, Hohenemser C, Kaspersonin JX, editors. Perilous progress: managing the hazards of technology. Boulder: Westview Press; 1985, p. 91-125.
|
26 |
Brenot J, Bonnefous S, Marris C. Testing the cultural theory of risk in France. Risk Anal 1998;18(6):729-739.
DOI
ScienceOn
|
27 |
Jackson J, Allum N, Gaskell G. Bridging levels of analysis in risk perception research: the case of the fear of crime [cited 2014 Sep 20]. Available from: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/15516/.
|
28 |
Park S, Smardon RC. Worldview and social amplification of risk framework: dioxin risk case in Korea. Int J Appl Environ Sci 2011; 6(2):173-191.
|
29 |
Weber EU, Hsee CK. Cross-cultural differences in risk perception, but cross-cultural similarities in attitudes towards perceived risk. Manag Sci 1998;44(9):1205-1217.
DOI
|
30 |
Sjoberg L. Risk perception by the public and by experts: a dilemma in risk management. Human Ecol Rev 1999;6(2):1-9.
|
31 |
Jacobs L, Worthley R. A comparative study of risk appraisal: a new look at risk assessment in different countries. Environ Monit Assess 1999;59:225-247.
DOI
|
32 |
Vaughan E, Nordenstam B. The perception of environmental risks among ethnically diverse groups. J Cross Cult Psychol 1991; 22(1): 29-60.
DOI
|
33 |
Chang EA, Park CY, Lim YW, Shin DC. A comparison of environmental risk perceptions between general public and experts. Korean J Environ Toxicol 2001;16(2):75-84 (Korean).
|
34 |
Cha YJ. An analysis of nuclear risk perception: with focus on developing effective policy alternatives. Int Rev Public Admin 2004; 8(2):33-47.
DOI
|
35 |
Kemp R. Why not in my backyard? A radical interpretation of public opposition to the deep disposal of radioactive waste in the United Kingdom. Environ Plan A 1990;22(9):1239-1258.
DOI
|