Comparing the Adoption of Contaminated Land Remediation Technologies in the United States, United Kingdom, and China

被引:12
|
作者
Hou, Deyi [1 ]
O'Connor, David [2 ,3 ]
Al-Tabbaa, Abir [4 ]
机构
[1] Parsons Corp Walnut Creek, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 USA
[2] Univ Cambridge, Dept Engn, Cambridge, England
[3] Golder Associates, Remediat Engn, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Cambridge, Dept Engn, Environm & Geotechn Grp, Cambridge, England
关键词
D O I
10.1002/rem.21413
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In many locations across the world, land contamination poses a serious threat to human health and the wider environment. For instance, a report published on April 17, 2014, revealed that China now has 16.1 percent of its land contaminated by various organic and inorganic contaminants, posing a range of challenges from human health risk to food security. The innovation and adoption of suitable remediation technologies is critical for solving land contamination issues. However, little is known about the pattern of remediation technology adoption, as well as its determining factors. This study uses a questionnaire survey in the United States, United Kingdom, and China to examine the spatial variation of remediation technology adoption. It further explores the temporal trend of remediation technology adoption using secondary data from the U.S. Superfund program. The study identified significant differences in remediation technology adoption among these countries, which are attributed to the different environmental, social, economic, and regulatory contexts. It is argued that the full implications of remediation technology adoption to sustainable development should be further studied, and policy instruments should be designed accordingly to promote those remediation technologies that align the best with long-term sustainability. Technology developers may also use these implications to adjust their research and development priorities. (C) 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:33 / 51
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] ADOPTION OF METRIC SYSTEM IN UNITED KINGDOM
    WYNN, AHA
    [J]. CHEMISTRY & INDUSTRY, 1968, (44) : 1512 - &
  • [22] PRODUCTIVITY IN CANADA, THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND THE UNITED STATES
    Maddison, A.
    [J]. OXFORD ECONOMIC PAPERS-NEW SERIES, 1952, 4 (03): : 235 - 242
  • [23] Wealth portfolios in the United Kingdom and the United States
    Banks, J
    Blundell, R
    Smith, JP
    [J]. PERSPECTIVES ON THE ECONOMICS OF AGING, 2004, : 205 - 246
  • [24] Crop cycles in the United Kingdom and in the United States
    Moore, HL
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY, 1919, 82 : 373 - 389
  • [25] UNITED-KINGDOM-UNITED-STATES TREATY
    OLIVER, JDB
    [J]. BRITISH TAX REVIEW, 1979, (02): : 70 - 71
  • [26] Wealth portfolios in the United Kingdom and the United States
    Banks, J
    Blundell, R
    Smith, JP
    [J]. PERSPECTIVES ON THE ECONOMICS OF AGING, 2004, : 205 - 246
  • [27] How to integrate mechanical licences for video games in the United States, the United Kingdom and China
    Goncalves, Lukas Ruthes
    Paim, Bruna Werlang
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GAMING AND VIRTUAL WORLDS, 2023, 15 (02): : 161 - 175
  • [28] RARE DISEASE CENTERS FOR PERIODIC PARALYSIS: CHINA VERSUS THE UNITED STATES AND UNITED KINGDOM
    Ke, Qing
    Qi, Ming
    Wu, Weiping
    Luo, Benyan
    Hanna, Michael
    Herr, Barbara
    Griggs, Robert C.
    [J]. MUSCLE & NERVE, 2014, 49 (02) : 171 - 174
  • [29] The Incoming Influenza Season - China, the United Kingdom, and the United States, 2021-2022
    Han, Shasha
    Zhang, Ting
    Lyu, Yan
    Lai, Shengjie
    Dai, Peixi
    Zheng, Jiandong
    Yang, Weizhong
    Zhou, Xiaohua
    Feng, Luzhao
    [J]. CHINA CDC WEEKLY, 2021, 3 (49): : 1039 - 1045
  • [30] The State of the State: Comparing Governance in China and the United States
    Zhao, Yongfei
    Peters, B. Guy
    [J]. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW, 2009, 69 : S122 - S128