Municipal waste incineration plants (MWIPs) are a source of emission of diverse pollutants that have been associated with environmental and health effects, mainly in relation to premises that are old and not well equipped or maintained. As a result, the public usually holds a negative view of such plants and tends to react adversely to construction of new plants. Understanding a population’s perceptions is key to ensuring the correct development of such infrastructure and adequately managing population health concerns and behaviours. In this study, we surveyed 173 residents living close (≤ 10 km) to an MWIP being built in San Sebastian (Gipuzkoa, Spain) and 164 living further away (>10 km). The questionnaire included sociodemographic and psycho-environmental measures. Answers to the questionnaire revealed a fairly low acceptance rate and the perception of a high risk for human health and the environment (average scores of 0.57, 3.07 and 2.89 respectively in a 0 to 4 scale), with no statistically significant differences between people living nearby and further afield. A hierarchical regression model built to explore the public’s acceptance of the MWIP explained 59% of the variance. Dominance and relative weight analyses revealed that the most important predictors of acceptance were trust in the information provided by the local government and perceived risk for human health, which accounted for 33.7% and 27.4% of the variance explained by the model respectively. Preference for landfilling and MWIP acceptance in a farther location made a less relevant contribution.

The Shore to Statehouse project supported the creation of an open-source, replicable, undergraduate experiential course on marine debris. Funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the course allowed undergraduate students in Connecticut, USA, to collect marine debris locally, then create a policy report for state legislators. Here we share the results of the project including data on four accumulation surveys on the Long Island Sound, as well as the impact on student motivation, attitudes, and behavior levels. Results include finding over 1600 individual pieces of debris totaling 19.4kg (42.8lb). In addition, the students experienced statistically significant improvements in knowledge and behavior scores. This open-source course can be replicated, empowering students to remove debris, provide important information to local policy makers, and improve knowledge and behavior.

Background, aim, and scope The controversy over the world's first genetically modified (GM) wheat, Roundup Ready wheat (RRW), challenged the efficacy of 'science-based' risk assessment, largely because it excluded the public, particularly farmers, from meaningful input. Risk analysis, in contrast, is broader in orientation as it incorporates scientific data as well as socioeconomic, ethical, and legal concerns, and considers expert and lay input in decision-making. Local knowledge (LK) of farmers is experience-based and represents a rich and reliable source of information regarding the impacts associated with agricultural technology, thereby complementing the scientific data normally used in risk assessment. The overall goal of this study was to explore the role of farmer LK in the a priori risk analysis of RRW. Materials and methods In 2004, data were collected from farmers using mail surveys sent across the three prairie provinces (i.e., Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta) in western Canada. A stratified random sampling approach was used whereby four separate sampling districts were identified in regions where wheat was grown for each province. Rural post offices were randomly selected in each sampling district using Canada Post databases such that no one post office exceeded 80 farms and that each sampling district comprised 225-235 test farms (n = 11,040). In total, 1,814 people responded, representing an adjusted response rate for farmers of 33%. A subsequent telephone survey showed there was no non-response bias. Results The primary benefits associated with RRW were associated with weed control, whereas risks emphasized the importance of market harm, corporate control, agronomic problems, and the likelihood of contamination. Overall, risks were ranked much higher than benefits, and the great majority of farmers were highly critical of RRW commercialization. In total, 83.2% of respondents disagreed that RRW should have unconfined release into the environment. Risk was associated with distrust in government and corporations, previous experience with GM canola, and a strong belief in the importance of community and environment. Farmers were critical of expert-based risk assessment, particularly RRW field trials, and believed that their LK was valuable for assessing agbiotechnology as a whole. Discussion Over 90% of canola production across the Canadian prairies makes use of herbicide-tolerant (HT) varieties. Yet, respondents were generally uniform in their criticism of RRW, regardless whether they were HT users, non-HT-users, conservation tillage or organic in approach. They had a sophisticated understanding of how GM trait confinement was intrinsically tied to grain system segregation and, ultimately, market accessibility, and were concerned that gene flow in RRW would not be contained. Organic farmers were particularly critical of RRW, in large part because certification standards prohibit the presence of GM traits. Farmers practicing conservation tillage were also at relatively great risk, in part because their dependence on glyphosate to control weeds increases the likelihood that RRW volunteer would become more difficult and costly to control. Conclusions This research is the first of its kind to include farmer knowledge in the a priori risk analysis of GM crops and, arguably, given its prairie-wide scope, is the largest scale, independent-farmer-focused study on GM crops ever conducted. The surprising uniformity in attitudes between users and non-users of GM technology and among organic, conventional, conservation tillage and GM using farmers speaks to the ability of farmers to discriminate among HT varieties. Our results clearly show that prairie farmers recognize that the risks associated with RRW commercialization outweigh any benefits. Recommendations and perspectives Farmer knowledge systems are holistic in nature, incorporating socioeconomic, cultural, political, and agroecological factors that all can contribute meaningfully to the pre-release evaluation of GM crops. The inclusion of farmers and other stakeholders in risk assessment will also help enhance and even restore public confidence in science-focused approaches to risk assessment. Although farmers are highly knowledgeable regarding RRW and arguably any agricultural technology, their expertise continues to be overlooked by decision-makers and regulators across North America.