When we talk about crafting safety and emission control guidelines to limit livestock-induced air pollution and its entailing health effects, I often only thought of taking into consideration the quantitative aspects of data but never so on how qualitive perceptions can also play a role.
As I was researching on the possible relationship between exposure to livestock-induced air pollution and effects on human health, I came across this interesting question that I never really thought of:
How odour nuisance can also affect one’s perception on the perceived risk and how in turn lowers the quality of life as well?
Risk perception: Odour nuisance and quality of life
Odour nuisance is the most direct and obvious aspect that we all can observe (and experience) when we pass by livestock farms as characterized by the foul smell of animal manure. This idea of risk perception was introduced by the Health Council of The Netherlands (2012) as policy actors began looking into the qualitative aspects of pollution as part of their assessment for control measures and safety guidelines for livestock production operations, as well as public health advisories.
In particular, the odour nuisance induced by livestock production was mentioned as the most common way of affecting risk perceptions and subsequently quality of life. This is often because odour nuisance affects humans directly, rather than other pollutants which may have a delayed effect or takes a longer time to manifest its detriments. As such, odour nuisance was one key factor that leads to why many locals voices out about their concerns over a decrease in the quality of life and alters their perceptions of risks.
In terms of livestock farms, the most prominent odorous gases are ammonia (NH3) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) (MSU Extension, 2011). These are irritants that produce distinctive and pungent chemical odours that are rather unpleasant and typically resembles the smell of ‘rotten egg’ especially in the case of H2S (WisContext, 2019). On top of NH3 and H2S, there are also other bacteria that emits foul smells from livestock manure and other organic matters as they decomposes.
Personally, though I did not expect this aspect of assessment to be taken into account of initially, I think that it is definitely important to include the idea of risk perception into policy planning, taking into consideration how odour nuisance can reduce quality of life and hence varying perceptions of neighbouring residents. Of course, it is important to based emission controls and safety guidelines based on scientific research and evidence. However, by adding a qualitative aspect to it, I believe, will make it qualify for a more holistic assessment for control measures.
With that said, what are your opinions on including risk perception as part of the assessment?
Detective Out,
Linying
References
Health Council of the Netherlands (2012). Health risks associated with livestock farms. The Netherlands: Health Council of the Netherlands. Retrieved from: https://www.healthcouncil.nl/binaries/healthcouncil/documents/advisory-reports/2012/11/30/health-risks-associated-with-livestock-farms/advisory-report-health-risks-associated-with-livestock-farms.pdf
Michigan State University Extension. (2011). The impact of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emissions from animal agriculture. MSU Extension. Retrieved from: https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/the_impact_of_ammonia_and_hydrogen_sulfide_emissions_from_animal_agricultur
WisContext. (2019). Whose manure smells worse: cows, pigs or poultry? WisContext. Retrieved from: https://www.wiscontext.org/whose-manure-smells-worse-cows-pigs-or-poultry
