The nature of the pandemic: Exploring the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic upon recreation visitor behaviors and experiences in parks and protected areas.

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically affected parks and protected areas and overall recreation visitation across the United States. While outdoor recreation has been demonstrated to be beneficial, especially during a pandemic, the resulting increase in recreation visitation raises concerns regarding the broader influence of social, situational, ecological, and behavioral factors upon overall visitor experiences. This study investigated the extent to which recreation visitors' behaviors and experiences have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic within the White Mountain National Forest (WMNF). A modified drop-off pick-up survey method was employed to collect population-level data from WMNF visitors from June to August of 2020 (n=317), at the height of the pandemic. Results from this mixed-method study suggest social factors (e.g., crowding and conflict), situational factors (e.g., access and closures), ecological factors (e.g., vegetation damage), behavioral factors (e.g., substitution), and sociodemographic factors (e.g., gender and income) significantly influenced overall visitor decision-making and experience quality within the WMNF. For example, more than one-third of visitors indicated the pandemic had either a major or severe impact upon their WMNF recreation experience. A more nuanced investigation of qualitative data determined that the majority of pandemic-related recreation impacts revolved around the themes of social impacts, general negative recreation impacts, situational and ecological impacts, and behavioral adaptation impacts. Moreover, historically marginalized populations (e.g., low-income households and females) within the sample reported significantly higher recreation experience impacts during the pandemic. This study demonstrates the influence of the pandemic upon outdoor recreation visitor experiences and behaviors and considers outdoor recreation as a central component within the broader social-ecological systems framework. This study demonstrates the influence of the pandemic upon outdoor recreation visitor experiences and behaviors and considers resource users a central component within the broader social-ecological systems conceptual framework. Management implications: This study found that during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, social, situational, ecological, behavioral, and sociodemographic factors significantly influenced overall visitor decision-making andexperience quality:· Social and general recreation impacts were most common, with approximately 56% of the sample reporting these issues.· Results suggest significant crowding and conflict impacts stemmed from interactions between in-state and out-of-state visitors, largely based upon perceived violations of pandemic protocols.· Moreover, historically marginalized populations stated unique recreation impacts during the pandemic. For instance, visitors from low-income households reported significantly less substitution options as opposed to high-income visitors.· Female visitors perceived significantly more pandemic-related conflict than male visitors.Study findings suggest visitor crowding and conflict should be prioritized by resource managers, especially amongst historically marginalized populations. Resource managers should consider adopting a broader social-ecological systems approach to parks and protected areas management, particularly during a global pandemic.

Satisfaction With Governmental Risk Communication Both Increases and Decreases COVID-19 Mitigation Behaviours.

Objectives: Over 3 years of the COVID-19 pandemic, and intense societal and governmental response, a wealth of research has examined risk perceptions and public risk mitigation behaviours. The vast majority of this inquiry has focused on health risks. Nevertheless, as a "total social fact" influencing nearly every aspect of quotidian life, the pandemic engenders a wide range of risk perceptions. Methods: Via a survey (N = 4,206) of representative samples of the general public in five European countries (Germany, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom), we explore perceptions of a range of personal/public health, economic, and societal risks. We also investigate the effects of perceptions of official governmental risk communication in one's country on risk perceptions and risk mitigation behaviours. Results: Structural equation modelling reveals that whilst perceptions of effective risk communication directly increase behaviours that mitigate COVID-19 health risks, these same perceptions indirectly decrease behaviour frequency via a mediated relationship with societal risk perceptions. Conclusion: The findings highlight the import of governmental authorities analysing and communicating about the range of risk perceptions citizens might have about a "total social fact" such as COVID-19.

The Relationship Between Barriers and Drivers of COVID-19 Protective Behaviors in Germany and the UK.

Objectives: To explore and evaluate the impact of factors including public risk perceptions on COVID-19 protective behaviors across the UK and Germany. Methods: We used survey data collected from a representative sample for Germany and the UK (total N = 1,663) between April and May 2021. Using a Structural Equation Model, we evaluate the role of personal health risk perceptions, official message quality, source of news, age and political orientation on COVID-19 protective behaviors in the context of German and UK risk communication strategies. Results: Personal health risk perceptions had a significant positive influence on protective behaviors. Economic risk perceptions had a negative direct influence on protective behaviors, particularly in Germany, as well as a positive indirect influence. Official message quality, use of official news sources and age had positive impacts on risk perceptions and protective behaviors. Left-wing political orientation was linked to greater likelihood of undertaking protective behaviors. Conclusion: For future pandemics, more attention should be paid to evaluating and conceptualizing different varieties of risk perceptions, risk communication strategies, and demographic variables alongside their impacts on undertaking protective behaviors.

Effect of linguistic framing and information provision on attitudes towards induced seismicity and seismicity regulation.

Shale gas is an expanding energy source worldwide, yet 'fracking' remains controversial. Amongst public concerns is induced seismicity (tremors). The UK had the most stringent induced seismicity regulations in the world, prior to instating a moratorium on shale gas development. The Government cited induced seismicity as the key rationale for its November 2019 English moratorium. Yet, little is known about how the public perceives induced seismicity, whether they support regulatory change, or how framing and information provision affect perceptions. Across three waves of a longitudinal experimental UK survey (N = 2777; 1858; 1439), we tested whether framing of induced seismicity influences support for changing regulations. The surveys compared (1) quantitative versus qualitative framings, (2) information provision about regulatory limits in other countries and (3) seismicity from other industries, and (4) framing a seismic event as an 'earthquake' or something else. We find low support for changing current policy, and that framing and information provision made little difference to this. The one strong influence on perceptions of seismic events came from the type of activity causing the event; shale gas extraction clearly led to the most negative reactions. We discuss implications for future UK policy on shale gas and geothermal energy in an evolving energy landscape.

Interaction between meteorological parameters and COVID-19: an ecological study on 406 authorities of the UK.

Understanding the factors affecting COVID-19 transmission is critical in assessing and mitigating the spread of the pandemic. This study investigated the transmissibility and death distribution of COVID-19 and its association with meteorological parameters to study the propagation pattern of COVID-19 in UK regions. We used the reported case and death per capita rate (as of November 13, 2020; before mass vaccination) and long-term meteorological data (temperature, humidity, precipitation, wind speed, and visibility) in 406 UK local authority levels based on publicity available secondary data. We performed correlation and regression analysis between COVID-19 variables and meteorological parameters to find the association between COVID-19 and independent variables. Student's T and Mann-Whitney's tests were used to analyze data. The correlation and regression analyses revealed that temperature, dew point, wind speed, and humidity were the most important factors associated with spread and death of COVID-19 (P <0.05). COVID-19 cases negatively correlated with humidity in areas with high population density, but the inverse in low population density areas. Wind speeds in low visibility areas, which are considered polluted air, may increase the spread of disease (r=0.42, P <0.05) and decrease the spread in high visibility areas (r=-0.16, P <0.05). Among low (T <10°C) and high (T >10°C) temperature areas, the average incidence rates were 2056.86 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1909.49-2204.23) and 1446.76 (95% CI: 1296.71-1596.81). Also, COVID-19 death per capita rates were 81.55 (95% CI: 77.40-85.70) and 69.78 (95% CI: 64.39-75.16) respectively. According to the comprehensive analysis, the spread of disease will be suppressed as the weather warms and humidity and wind speed decrease. Different environmental conditions can increase or decrease spread of the disease due to affecting spread of disease vectors and by altering people's behavior.

Effect of "finite pool of worry" and COVID-19 on UK climate change perceptions.

Research reveals that a "finite pool of worry" constrains concern about and action on climate change. Nevertheless, a longitudinal panel survey of 1,858 UK residents, surveyed in April 2019 and June 2020, reveals little evidence for diminishing climate change concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, the sample identifies climate change as a bigger threat than COVID-19. The findings suggest climate change has become an intransigent concern within UK public consciousness.

Pharmaceutical Benefit-Risk Perception and Age Differences in the USA and Germany.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding how patients of all ages perceive the benefits and risks of medical treatments is vitally important. Yet, the role of older age on pharmaceutical benefit-risk perceptions has hardly been empirically investigated as a central focus of study. OBJECTIVE: This study tested the generalizability of recent pilot findings to explore benefit-risk perception age differences between adults aged 65 years old and over (older group) and those aged 18-64 years old (younger group). METHODS: An online survey representative for age, sex, and education was conducted in Ohio, USA (N = 1520) and Germany (N = 1536). A combination of benefit, risk, and affect questions measured respondents' perceptions of 18 medicines, tests, vaccines, and procedures. Further questions investigated general perceptions of side effects and effectiveness, as well as respondents' reliance on different sources of medicines information. RESULTS: Clear age differences were found that strongly support recent pilot findings. Older adults perceived prescription medicines significantly more positively than their younger counterparts. They had significantly higher benefit and lower risk perceptions for most, but not all, medical treatments investigated. Older adults' benefit-risk perceptions were more strongly correlated with positive/negative affect, that is, their positive/negative experiences and feelings of "goodness" or "badness" they associated with each medical treatment investigated. They also perceived doctors and pharmacists as more competent and trustworthy. Contrary to popular belief, both age groups ranked their reliance on 15 different medical (e.g. doctors), societal (e.g. social media), industry (e.g. pharmaceutical company websites), and governmental (e.g. regulatory agencies) sources of medicines information remarkably similarly. CONCLUSION: Age has an important role in patients' pharmaceutical benefit-risk perceptions. Findings show that, when designing messages, benefit-risk communicators should incorporate age differences. This includes older patients' positive perceptions of pharmaceuticals, greater reliance on affect, and information seeking versus scanning behaviour. Field experiments are now needed to test the effectiveness of such changes for improving benefit-risk communication practice.

Transparency in Europe: A Quantitative Study.

In recent years, European pharmaceutical regulators have increasingly committed to heightening access to raw safety-related data as part of a wave of transparency initiatives (e.g., providing public Internet-mediated access to clinical trials data). Yet, the regulators--who are under significant pressure--have not yet benefited from a systematic review of this new policy. In seeking to inject much needed evidence, this article explores the effects of new transparency policies designed to promote meaningful communication of risks and benefits to patients. Results of a cross-national European survey with respondents from Great Britain, the Netherlands, Spain, France, Germany, and Sweden (N = 5,648) shed light on how patients and the public are likely to react to the regulators' new transparency policies. The findings demonstrate clear national variations in how European citizens are likely to react and emphasize the need to develop evidence-based, reasoned transparency policies that integrate benefit-risk communication. The authors conclude by providing six specific recommendations, informed by the study, that seek to improve the European transparency model both within the medical field and across health, safety, and environmental policy domains.

Understanding risk perceptions to enhance communication about human-wildlife interactions and the impacts of zoonotic disease.

Inclusion of wildlife in the concept of One Health is important for two primary reasons: (1) the physical health of humans, domesticated animals, and wildlife is linked inextricably through shared diseases, and (2) humans' emotional well-being can be affected by their perceptions of animal health. Although an explicit premise of the One Health Initiative is that healthy wildlife contribute to human health, and vice versa, the initiative also suggests implicitly that wildlife may pose threats to human health through zoonotic disease transmission. As people learn more about One Health, an important question surfaces: How will they react to communications carrying the message that human health and wildlife health are linked? In the absence of adequate relevant research data, we recommend caution in the production and dissemination of One Health messages because of possible unintended or collateral effects. Understanding how and why individuals perceive risks related to wildlife diseases is essential for determining message content that promotes public support for healthy wildlife populations, on the one hand, and, on the other, for identifying messages that might inadvertently increase concern about human health effects of diseased wildlife. To that end, we review risk perception research and summarize the few empirical studies that exist on perceived risk associated with zoonoses. We conclude with some research questions that need answering to help One Health practitioners better understand how the public will interpret their messages and thus how to communicate positively and without negative collateral consequences for wildlife conservation.