Scholarlink

<p>This is a review of public perception of air quality and awareness studies of the past 25 years (1999–2024). It shows general trends and characteristics which include: (1) An increase in studies worldwide and in Asia in particular, (2) the majority of citizens being unaware of official indexes, (3) the tendency to rely more on individual sensory perception to assess air quality than official data, (4) overall perception being determined by people’s particular microenvironment, psychology, socioeconomic characteristics and exposure to media, (5) awareness of official data not translating in trust in the data, (6) people’s definition of air pollution not always matching the scientific term, (7) official sensors being inadequate to cover wide areas and giving skewed results, (8) spikes in awareness being observed after major pollution events (China, 2013), wildfires (US), active warning through alerts by the government (Korea, 2014) and during lockdowns in the COVID pandemic, (9) air quality becoming an indicator of government satisfaction. Overall, new technologies have enabled new trends in research involving big data while the use of phone apps for air quality might render official indexes irrelevant in the discussion of awareness. These new trends might change the landscape of this type of research altogether.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

People’s perceptions of air pollution and their awareness of official indexes at the start of the twenty-first century: a review

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年4月23日

查看全文
  • Sophia Pinakidou

摘要

This is a review of public perception of air quality and awareness studies of the past 25 years (1999–2024). It shows general trends and characteristics which include: (1) An increase in studies worldwide and in Asia in particular, (2) the majority of citizens being unaware of official indexes, (3) the tendency to rely more on individual sensory perception to assess air quality than official data, (4) overall perception being determined by people’s particular microenvironment, psychology, socioeconomic characteristics and exposure to media, (5) awareness of official data not translating in trust in the data, (6) people’s definition of air pollution not always matching the scientific term, (7) official sensors being inadequate to cover wide areas and giving skewed results, (8) spikes in awareness being observed after major pollution events (China, 2013), wildfires (US), active warning through alerts by the government (Korea, 2014) and during lockdowns in the COVID pandemic, (9) air quality becoming an indicator of government satisfaction. Overall, new technologies have enabled new trends in research involving big data while the use of phone apps for air quality might render official indexes irrelevant in the discussion of awareness. These new trends might change the landscape of this type of research altogether.