Public perception and acceptance

Public perception and acceptance is critical to the success of a given fluoride treatment technique. To make a technique popular, there must be an 

Considering the above screening strategies as well as the summary in Table 1, it is observed that adsorption technique for fluoride removal from water is an established, low-cost, environmentally benign technique that has public acceptance. Thus, our discussion will henceforth concentrate on adsorptive removal of fluoride from drinking water. 

Screening strategy Precipitation and coagulation Membrane processes Ion exchange Electrochemical Adsorption 

Regulatory compliance MCL not achievable MCL achievable MCL achievable MCL achievable MCL achievable 

Appropriateness Nalgonda method applicable to LDCs Not appropriate to LDCs Not appropriate to LDCs Not appropriate to LDCs Appropriate to LDCs and is versatile 

---

Improved public perception and acceptance in the business community... 

Public perception and acceptance Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable At development stage Acceptable... 

People are more willing to accept risks from which they will receive a direct, tangible benefit. A one-company town will likely have widespread community support for the company and accept the risks of its business—it directly or indirectly provides the livelihood for most families in the community. This may not be the case in an area having a broad-based manufacturing and service economy. Here the relatively small public benefit from a new plant may be outweighed by the public s perception of the plant s risk. People are unwilling to tolerate a given level of risk unless there is a direct benefit to themselves. 

In the United States, however, the public perception of nuclear energy is less than favorable. There are formidable disadvantages, including the creation of radioactive wastes and the possibility of an accident that releases radioactive substances into the environment. In rebuttal, advocates point out that we cannot insist that nuclear fission energy be absolutely safe while at the same time accept tanker spills, global warming, acid rain, and coal-miner diseases. 

Public perception of a risk often becomes heightened when there is a perceived lack of voluntary control on exposure scenarios and exposure levels. It follows that human exposure to chemicals via the environment as a result of pollution or contamination tends to be a particular concern and a useful lobbying focus for many environmental NGO. Social mobilisation can result in risk level attenuation rather than amplification [505]. For instance, when a chemical is perceived as being of particular value to society, the level of risk may be more acceptable to many members of the public [506]. 

Sometimes the scientific and/or the official assessment of a risk will be similar to that of the general public, in which case the management and acceptance of the risk will be easier. However, when the pubhc perception of the risk is greater than it really is, politicians may have to take steps (which are really unnecessary) to try to reduce the risk, with the result that huge sums of money may be spent for no real benefit (for example, see pp. 125-6 on Love Canal). 

Ricci, M., Bellaby, P. Flynn, R. 2007b Stakeholders and publics perception of hydrogen energy technologies In Flynn, R. Bellaby, P. (eds) Risk and the Public Acceptance of New Technologies, Palgrave-Macmillan, Basingstoke, New York, Chapter 9. 

Personal habits, cultural practices and individual perceptions strongly influence tbe acceptance of a building and its indoor air quality. Public intervention in non-public buildings and the enforcement of strict indoor air quality regulations beyond the requirements of building codes, fire ordinances and safety rules face serious impediments. 

---