Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Divergence in stakeholder perception of sustainable remediation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sustainability Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The modern society is increasingly demanding sustainable practices in engineering fields. In the specific case of engineering practices for restoring contaminated land, there is an ongoing sustainable remediation movement which has rapidly drawn attention from both the industry and governments. It is well recognized that decision making in contaminated land remediation depends on the interaction of a variety of stakeholders. However, there is still no consensus as for how various stakeholders perceive sustainable practices in remediation, and how stakeholders interact in decision making that may lead to sustainable practices. The present study proposes a hypothetical model depicting the mediating effect of stakeholder perception in decision making. Using empirical experiences, questionnaire survey, and qualitative interview results, the present study found that there is divergent perception by various stakeholders regarding how sustainable behavior is adopted and how it is affected by stakeholder influence. The divergent view was attributed to varying organizational objectives, information access, and self-perception. Moreover, it found that incorporating sustainability into real engineering practice is transdisciplinary and requires transdisciplinary processes that can help various stakeholders to reach consensus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alberini A, Tonin S, Turvani M, Chiabai A (2007) Paying for permanence: public preferences for contaminated site cleanup. J Risk Uncertain 34:155–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Tabbaa A, Harbottle M, Evans C (2007) Robust sustainable technical solutions. In: Sustain brownfield regeneration: liveable places from problem spaces, Part 3, Chap 8, pp 177–202

  • Bardos P, Bone B, Boyle R et al (2011) Applying sustainable development principles to contaminated land management using the SuRF-UK framework. Remediat J 21:77–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettencourt LMA, Kaur J (2011) Evolution and structure of sustainability science. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:19540–19545

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blake J (1999) Overcoming the “value-action gap”in environmental policy: tensions between national policy and local experience. Local Environ 4:257–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnard P (1991) A method of analysing interview transcripts in qualitative research. Nurse Educ Today 11:461–466

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman PM (2002) Integrating toxicology and ecology: putting the “eco” into ecotoxicology. Mar Pollut Bull 44:7–15

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • CLARINET (2002a) Sustainable management of contaminated land: an overview. Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies (succeeded by Common Forum on Contaminated Land in the European Union)

  • CLARINET (2002b) An analysis of national and EU RTD programmes related to sustainable land and groundwater management. Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies (succeeded by Common Forum on Contaminated Land in the European Union)

  • Common Forum (2010) Common forum contribution to ECA audit on Brownfield regeneration in Europe. Paris, France

  • DEFRA (2012) Environmental protection act 1990: Part 2A Contaminated land statutory guidance. London, UK

  • Delmas M, Toffel MW (2004) Stakeholders and environmental management practices: an institutional framework. Bus Strateg Environ 13:209–222. doi:10.1002/bse.409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis DE, Hadley PW (2009) Sustainable remediation white paper—Integrating sustainable principles, practices, and metrics into remediation projects. Remediat J 19:5–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman Publishing Inc, Marshfield

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman J (1999) Stakeholder influence strategies. Acad Manag Rev 24:191–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Garvare R, Johansson P (2010) Management for sustainability—a stakeholder theory. Total Qual Manag 21:737–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geng Y, Doberstein B (2008) Developing the circular economy in China: challenges and opportunities for achieving’leapfrog development’. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 15:231–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geroski PA (2000) Models of technology diffusion. Res Policy 29:603–625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gong Y (2010) International experience in policy and regulatory frameworks for brownfied site management. Washington DC

  • Gordon M, Lockwood M, Vanclay F et al (2012) Divergent stakeholder views of corporate social responsibility in the Australian forest plantation sector. J Environ Manag 113:390–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grob A (1995) A structural model of environmental attitudes and behaviour. J Environ Psychol 15:209–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn T, Scheermesser M (2006) Approaches to corporate sustainability among German companies. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 13:150–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer D, Wildavsky A (1989) The open-ended, semi-structured interview: An (almost) operational guide. In: Wildavsky A (ed) Craftways organization of scholary work. New Brunswick, transaction, pp 57–101

  • Hein L, Van Koppen K, De Groot RS, Van Ierland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57:209–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hines JM, Hungerford HR, Tomera AN (1987) Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: a meta-analysis. J Environ Educ 18:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hou D (2011) Vision 2020: more needed in materials reuse and recycling to avoid land contamination. Environ Sci Technol 45:6227–6228. doi:10.1021/es202079y

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hou D, Leu RJ (2009) Optimizing the remedial process at a petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated site using a three-tier approach. J Environ Eng 135:1171

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hou D, Al-Tabbaa A, Guthrie P, Watanabe K (2012a) Sustainable waste and materials management: national policy and global perspective. Environ Sci Technol 46:2494–2495. doi:10.1021/es3004552

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hou D, Luo J, Al-Tabbaa A (2012b) Shale gas can be a double-edged sword for climate change. Nat Clim ChangE 2:385–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hou D, Al-Tabbaa A, Chen H, Mamic I (2014a) Factor analysis and structural equation modeling of sustainable behaviour in contaminated land remediation. J Clean Prod. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.054

    Google Scholar 

  • Hou D, Al-Tabbaa A, Guthrie P (2014b) The adoption of sustainable remediation behaviour in the US and UK: a cross country comparison and determinant analysis. Sci Total Environ 490:905–913

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hou D, O’Connor D, Al-Tabbaa A (2014c) Modeling the diffusion of contaminated site remediation technologies. Water Air Soil Pollut 225:1–6

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • IBM (2011) IBM SPSS bootstrapping 20

  • ITRC (2011) Green and sustainable remediation: state of the science and practice. Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson T (2005) Motivating sustainable consumption: a review of evidence on consumer behaviour and behavioural change [online]. Report to the Sustainable Development Research Network, Guildford, University of Surrey, Centre for Environmental Strategy, UK

  • Kates R, Clark W et al (2000) Sustainability science. Environment and natural resources program, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

  • Kerselaers E, Rogge E, Vanempten E et al (2013) Changing land use in the countryside: stakeholders’ perception of the ongoing rural planning processes in Flanders. Land Use Policy 32:197–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ko DW, Stewart WP (2002) A structural equation model of residents’ attitudes for tourism development. Tour Manag 23:521–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollmuss A, Agyeman J (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ Educ Res 8:239–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA, Clark WC (2010) Toward a science of sustainability. Center for international development. Working. paper 196

  • Lorenzoni I, Nicholson-Cole S, Whitmarsh L (2007) Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Glob Environ Change 17:445–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald S, Oates CJ (2006) Sustainability: consumer perceptions and marketing strategies. Bus Strateg Environ 15:157–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mihelcic JR, Crittenden JC, Small MJ et al (2003) Sustainability Science and Engineering: the emergence of a new metadiscipline. Environ Sci Technol 37:5314–5324. doi:10.1021/es034605h

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • NRC (1991) Committee on environmental epidemiology, environmental epidemiology, vol. 1, Public health and hazardous wastes. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

  • Pronin E (2007) Perception and misperception of bias in human judgment. Trends Cogn Sci 11:37–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiner D, Liang X (2011) Stakeholder views on financing carbon capture and storage demonstration projects in China. Environ Sci Technol 46:643–651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard SRJ (2005) Landscape visualisation and climate change: the potential for influencing perceptions and behaviour. Environ Sci Policy 8:637–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparrevik M, Ellen GJ, Duijn M (2011) Evaluation of factors affecting stakeholder risk perception of contaminated sediment disposal in oslo harbor†. Environ Sci Technol 45:118–124. doi:10.1021/es100444t

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Steg L, Gifford R (2005) Sustainable transportation and quality of life. J Transp Geogr 13:59–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steg L, Vlek C, Slotegraaf G (2001) Instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affective motives for using a motor car. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 4:151–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoll-Kleemann S, O’Riordan T, Jaeger CC (2001) The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups. Glob Environ Chang 11:107–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan T, VanVeen HJ, Davidson L, Bardos RP (2001) Review of discussions about decision support issues in Europe and North America at the NATO/CCMS special session, and overall conclusions. EPA 542-R-01-002. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

  • Surf-UK (2010) A framework for assessing the sustainability of soil and groundwater remediation. Contaminated land: applications in real environments, London, UK

  • USEPA (2004) Cleaning up the nation’s waste sites: markets and technology trends, 2004th edn. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (2008) Green remediation: incorporating sustainable environmental practices into remediation of contaminated sites. EPA 542-R-08-002. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

  • USEPA (2009) Principles for greener cleanups. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

  • USGBC (2011) LEED 2009 for new construction and major renovations (updated November 2011). United States Green Building Council, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermeir I, Verbeke W (2006) Sustainable food consumption: exploring the consumer “attitude–behavioral intention” gap. J Agric Environ Ethics 19:169–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss RS (2008) Learning from strangers: the art and method of qualitative interview studies. Free Press, New York, USA

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Haidian District, Beijing, 100084, China

    Deyi Hou

Authors
  1. Deyi Hou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deyi Hou.

Additional information

Handled by Keishiro Hara, Osaka University, Japan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hou, D. Divergence in stakeholder perception of sustainable remediation. Sustain Sci 11, 215–230 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0346-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0346-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation