22

issn 1822 – 8402 european integration studies. 2010. no 4

risK society in latvia:
CHARACTERISTICS Of EnVIROnMEnTAL ASpECTS

Iveta Briska, Ritma Rungule 
Riga Stradins University

Abstract

In the conditions of the contemporary risk society the alternate nature and the variety of risks issue a 
serious challenge to the world community, which requires an urgent solution.

Today the principle of sustainable development takes an increasing significance in the policies of all countries. 
The concept of sustainable development is based upon the balance between financial, social and ecological 
resources of our planet. Successful management of all these resources would ensure the sustainability.

Achievement of the goals of sustainable development, in its turn, requires conjoint actions of governments, 
local authorities, businesses and each individual.

This article is aimed at the analysis of actions taken by world-wide organisations, governments, and local 
authorities to provide sustainable development, including legislative, institutional, regulatory and public 
efforts exerted at all levels in the sphere of identification, assessment and management of environmental 
risks under the conditions of risk society. The volume of the article unfortunately dose not allow covering of 
all aspects related to this issue, as well as setting up a thorough discourse in this matter. Therefore, the article 
provides a brief analysis of theoretical base of the concept of the risk society and the idea of sustainable 
development and reviews legal, institutional, and regulatory instruments applied for identification, 
assessment and management of environmental risks applied both globally and in Latvia. It also stresses the 
significance of rising environmental risk awareness and promotion of readiness for ecological conduct, as 
it would facilitate meeting the goals of sustainable development by more active participation of population 
in the activities targeted at the environment protection in general, and preservation and restoration of the 
natural resources. 

The article also describes the current level of public awareness of environmental problems in Latvia, as 
well as the problems the Latvian residents consider to be of highest priority in the field of environment. The 
readiness of the Latvian population to contribute to environment protection by individual activities is also 
assessed on the basis of statistical data acquired in the course of the research conducted for the purposes of 
this article.

Keywords:

Risk society, sustainable development, environmental risks, environmental risk assessment, environmental 
risk awareness.

Introduction

The term of the risk society originated in late 80s 
of the 20th century to describe a society endangered 
by modernization and human activities and the way it 
responds to these risks. This term is first of all associated 
with the works of famous sociologists Ulrich Beck and 
Anthony Giddens.

Another recently developed concept is the concept of 
sustainable development introduced in United Nations 
World Commission on Environment and Development 
report “Our Common Future”, and is widely used 
since United Nations Conference on Environment 
and Development (UNCED), Rio de Janeiro, 1992. 
Sustainable development should “meet the needs of 
the present without compromising the ability of future 

generations to meet their own needs” (Bruntland, 
1987).

Contemporary risk society faces a variety of risks, 
both perceived and unperceived, including global 
warming, exposure to urban, industrial and agrochemical 
pollution, industrial accidents, toxic chemicals, air, 
water and noise pollution and hazardous wastes. All 
such risks require urgent solutions to ensure proper risk 
management, as well as preparedness and response to 
these risks to facilitate economical and environmental 
sustainability.

At the same time the ever-changing modern world 
experiences the changes in the sources of environmental 
risks, as well as in their nature and effects, which in its 
turn makes it necessary to develop new solutions, to 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

23

design new social institutions to monitoring the impact 
of these risks on the environment, and to manage the risks 
associated with changing conditions of the risk society. 
This implies collective actions at all levels. Global and 
cross-national policies, regional and local regulations, 
as well as individual environmental risk perception, risk 
attitudes and environmental behaviour – all these factors 
are essential to ensure sustainable development.

The object of the paper is the environmental 
risks aspects in Latvia under the conditions of the risk 
society.

The aim of the work is to analyse the legislative, 
institutional, regulatory and public aspects of 
environmental risk identification, assessment and 
management under the conditions of risk society.

The following tasks have been set in order to achieve 
the above aims of the article:

To analyze theoretical framework of the concepts of  •
the risk society and sustainable development;
To review the legal, institutional, and regulatory  •
instruments applied for identification, assessment and 
management of environmental risks both globally 
and in Latvia.
To highlight the issue of assessment of environmental  •
risk awareness and readiness for ecological behaviour 
worldwide and in Latvia.
To draw conclusions on the basis of the collected  •
information and performed analysis.
The methods used include the analysis of theoretical 

scientific literature and research materials related to 
the subject of the paper, as well as the analysis of the 
available statistical data.

Highlighting the importance of more in-depth 
assessment of public opinion towards environmental 
risks and public readiness for pro-environmental 
behaviour to ensure sustainable development of Latvia 
constitute practical importance of the article.

Legal and institutional tools of risk management

During the last years the world has been living in 
risk society, as defined by the German sociologist Ulrich 
Beck. According to him, “ours is the age of the smallest 
possible cause for the greatest possible destruction” 
(Beck, 1995). Characteristics of the risks society and 
interrelations within it have been debated extensively in 
sociologists’ works all over the world.

In one of his works Beck also stated that industrial 
society that used to be characterised by the distribution 
is turning now into a society, for which distributions of 
risk and hazard is typical. That is to say, the advanced 
modern world, the social production of material benefits 
is closely connected with risk production. Accordingly, 
the problems and conflicts in such society are overlaid 
by problems and conflicts arising from over-production, 
definition and distribution of scientifically and 

technologically produced risks. Another idea introduced 
by Ulrich Beck in his famous book “Risk Society: 
Towards a New Modernity” is that that science has 
changed from an activity in the service of truth to an 
activity without truth (Beck, 1992). All this implies that 
the contemporary society, among other things, faces a 
great variety of problems requiring urgent solutions. 

The theorists argue that social, political and 
institutional reforms are necessary to accommodate 
the transition from industrial modernity, which was 
focused on the production of material goods, to reflexive 
modernity, which is focused on the production of 
knowledge, the avoidance of risk and the preservation 
of nature (Ekberg, 2007).

Christopher Hood, Professor of Government at 
Oxford University, in his book “The Government of Risk: 
Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes” introduced 
the concept of a “risk regulation regime”, which enables 
comparative description and analysis of the rules and 
institutional arrangements. The book also describes 
various risk regulation regimes, examines major driving 
forces in the process of formation of such regimes, e.g. 
market failure, public opinion, etc., analyses the causes 
of regulatory failure or success, as well as distinguishes 
the difference between “natural” and “socially created”, 
state-created and market-created, “voluntary” and 
“involuntary”, high-tech and low-tech, individually, and 
corporately produced risks. (Hood, 2001)

Considering the diversity of risks the contemporary 
society is exposed to and a vast variety of effects of these 
risks it is fair to say that these risks require a thorough 
and comprehensive assessment to enable their expedient 
management.

According to Giddens, another famous sociologist 
who approached the phenomenon of the risk society in 
his works, “risk calculation has to include the risk of 
which experts are consulted”. (Giddens, 1996)

Both Beck and Giddens believe that the idea of 
wealth creation, which is characteristic for industrial 
modernity, has been obscured by the idea of risk 
avoidance, class consciousness has been displaced by a 
risk consciousness and the increased awareness of living 
in an environment of risk has become a major catalyst 
for social transformation (Ekberg, 2007).

To further understand the changing nature of risk and 
the different attitudes towards risk in the risk society, 
Beck and Giddens investigated a number of changes 
in our understanding of the origins and impacts of 
environmental and economical risks. These changes 
include the shift in emphasis from the risks associated 
with nature itself to technological risks, the shift from a 
realistic to a social constructivist perspective on risk, the 
increasing gap between actual and perceived risk, and 
the change in the distribution of risks. (Beck, 1992)

Beck’s concept of the risk society is basing, among 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

24

other things, upon the rise of a new “risk consciousness” 
around techno-social developments (Wilkinson, 2001). 
The environmental and health risks from technologies, 
for example, like pesticides, would be expected to 
dominate public discourses in a risk society (Blok, 
2008). Common knowledge interlaces with issues of 
scientific expertise in various ways (Lidskog, 1996). 
Therefore, besides the significance of risk regulation 
regimes, it is necessary to analyse, how the public is 
engaged in active forms of experimental knowledge-
making. An intermeshing of ways of “knowing” and 
“acting upon” environmental risks should also be taken 
into consideration. Ecological awareness today seems 
to reflect growing uncertainties and anxieties related 
to the changing character of late modern society. Such 
uncertainties and anxieties do not only pertain to high-
consequence risks, as exemplified by the Chernobyl 
accident, but also to local problems of providing safe 
drinking water from the tap. (Mol, 1993)

All the above issues debated extensively in 
theoretical literature regarding to the risk society and the 
risks this society is exposed to have become a subject 
of worldwide empirical research in order to provide the 
basis for the process of decision-making in the field of 
assessment, management and prevention of risks at a 
global, national, regional and local levels.

Legal and institutional tools of risk management

Considering that global ecological problems are 
closely interconnected, their dependence on the state of 
the global economy and the level of social development 
in all regions of the world becomes stronger, national 
governments and institutions have ever less opportunities 
to influence ecological issues within individual states 
without necessity to coordinate their actions with other 
states and governments. 

Until recently, coordinated actions related to solving 
environmental issues were impeded by the absence of 
an international organization, dealing with ecological, 
demographic, and natural resource issues at a global 
level. In 1972, in Stockholm, the first Conference of the 
United Nations Organization on environmental issues 
was held. During this conference there a Declaration 
was approved, which for the first time stated the 
principles and recommendations on the development 
of the Global Ecological Policy. At the same time by 
decision of the General Assembly of the United Nations 
Organization, the United Nations Organization Program 
on environment was approved. This specialized 
international organization has received extensive 
authorities in the sphere of management of coordinated 
actions among international organizations, responsible 
for environmental protection, prevention and reducing 
of ecological risks.

One of the major functions of UNEP is a global 

assessment of environmental situation and natural 
resources, as well as providing information on the results 
of such assessments to governments and population. 
In particular, the debating document of the seventh 
special session of UNEP, held in 2002 in Columbia, 
has outlined the tasks for national and local regulatory 
authorities in relation to providing of information and 
education in the field of environmental protection. 
These tasks include, inter alia, the necessity of inclusion 
of the section on economy of management of natural 
resources into economical educational programs of all 
educational institutions and research institutes, which 
could facilitate expanding knowledge on environmental 
issues. Furthermore, importance of coordination 
between local and regional strategies, enforcement of 
information infrastructure, initiative support aiming 
to disclose information, as well as the development 
of environmental education at all levels has been 
highlighted (UNEP,2002).

Institutional controls represent another tool, designed 
to influence human behaviour and activity. These 
controls mostly take the form of legal or administrative 
restrictions. Such controls are usually referred to as 
land use controls (ICMA, 2000) or activity and use 
limitations (Edwards, 2000). These controls are most 
often described according to their control method or the 
way of their application (Kostelnik, 2005).

Currently, along with UNEP, many regional and 
sub-regional organizations are actively involved in the 
process of solution of global ecological issues. These 
organisations include the Organization for Economic 
Cooperation and Development (OECD), European 
Union (ЕU), Organization of Nordic States, Council 
of the Baltic Sea States, and many others. The tasks of 
these organizations include the increase of population 
awareness on the environment protection and 
stimulation of development of ecological consciousness 
for involvement of society into solving of environmental 
issues.

European Parliament and Council Directive 2001/42/
EC states that the Community Environmental Policy, 
inter alia, is to contribute to the preservation, protection 
and improvement of improvement of the quality of the 
environment, protection of public health, as well as 
prudent and efficient use of natural resources, and is to 
be based on the precautionary principle.

Environmental assessment is a significant measure 
for integration of ecological considerations, developing 
and approving plans and programs, which may have 
significant environmental effect in the Member States, 
as this ensures that the impact of implementation of 
such plans and programs is taken into account during 
the development phase and before their approval.

Adoption of environmental assessment procedures at 
the planning and programming level shall be beneficial 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

25

to companies by providing a more consistent framework 
of actions, including appropriate ecological information 
into the decision-making process. The inclusion of 
a more extensive factor complex into the decision-
making process shall facilitate more stable and effective 
solutions. To ensure a high level of environment 
protection a variety of systems of environmental 
assessment in Member States a common procedural 
requirements (EC, 2001).

The main provisions of sustainable development 
of the Republic of Latvia state that the sustainable 
development is a development, which supplies the needs 
of the current generation without causing difficulties 
for the coming generations in supplying their needs 
(Latvijas Vides ministrija, 1998).

Development is a notion of quality, which includes 
ideas on improvement and progress, as well as 
improvement of cultural, social and economic sphere.

Objectives of the sustainable development of the 
Republic of Latvia result from principles, defined in the 
Rio de Janeiro Declaration. Some of these principles 
related to the environmental issues include:

Latvia shall develop a stable national economy, which  •
is able to ensure the needs of the society, and, at the 
same time, shall ensure that the speed of economic 
growth exceeds the rate of pollution and the use of 
resources. 
Latvia shall ensure safe and a health-safe environment  •
both for the current and coming generations.
Latvia shall ensure sufficient activities for preserving  •
biological diversity and protection of ecosystems.
Latvia shall develop a responsible attitude of  •
the society towards natural resources and shall 
continuously increase efficiency of the use of natural 
resources.
Latvia shall ensure integration of environmental  •
issues and shall develop broad application of 
environmental policy measures in the policies of 
other industries.
Latvia shall ensure that the market economy  •
mechanisms serve for sustainable development. 
Latvia shall ensure the involvement of the society in  •
the processes of sustainable development. 
Latvia shall evaluate its progress in the achievement of  •
the specified objectives of sustainable development. 
(Latvijas Vides ministrija, 1998).
To solve the above tasks various policy documents 

have been developed in Latvia both for specific sectors 
and general documentation, which includes the principles 
of sustainable development. The most significant are 
the Long-term Economic Strategy of Latvia and the 
National Development Plan, while in the environmental 
sector – Environmental Protection Policy Plan for 
Latvia. Solutions of environmental protection issues 
have been included in policy plans, strategies, and laws 

and regulations (Latvijas Vides ministrija, 1998).
Sustainable Development Strategy of Latvia 

(SDSL) up to the year 2030 is a document related to 
the development planning, which specifies long-term 
priorities for the development within the territory of 
Latvia. Elaboration of the strategy has been performed 
by the Ministry of Regional Development and Local 
Government of the Republic of Latvia (MRDLG).

Considering that implementation of such policy 
planning document involves significant impact 
on environment, Strategic Environmental Impact 
Assessment (SEIA) was carried out by external advisers 
in relation to the abovementioned plan. SEIA has been 
carried out in compliance with requirements of the 
law „On Environmental Impact Assessment” and the 
Regulation No. 157 by the Cabinet of Ministers of 23 
March, 2004, „Procedure for the Strategic Environmental 
Impact Assessment”. Within the framework of SEIA, the 
Environmental Report has been prepared. Environmental 
Report is a document, containing information obtained 
during the process of the Strategic Environmental Impact 
Assessment.

Sustainable Development Strategy of Latvia up to the 
year 2030 is a document of the highest hierarchical long-
term national level development planning. In October 
2007, SDSL basic report was prepared, where directions 
of strategy development were outlined and ideas on the 
sustainable development of Latvia were discussed.

SDSL has been developed, identifying future 
challenges, analyzing capitals available for Latvia, 
and searching for the opportunities of sustainable 
development. Within the framework of SDSL, priorities 
rather than single available course of action have been 
specified. Furthermore, the most successful solutions for 
implementation of the chosen primary course of action 
have been proposed. It leaves open the choice of other 
consistent and non-contradictory course of actions and 
solutions, if they facilitate implementation of priorities.

The model of sustainability requires an integrated 
solution of economics, environmental and social 
issues, thus, both vertical and horizontal collaboration 
mechanisms become of high importance.

Horizontal collaboration, for instance, among cities, 
institutions of different industries, or public organizations 
of different spheres allow combine available resources 
and solve issues beyond limits of influence of every 
individual social player.

Vertical collaboration for governmental level 
institutions, local governments and population 
communities provide opportunity to make more effective 
decisions and find the most optimal solutions.

Effective balancing of economic, social and 
environmental considerations requires active involvement 
of the entire society into the policy development process. 
Providing that the major part of the society is actively 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

26

involved, it will be possible to find optimal solutions and 
effective response to global challenges (SIA “Analītisko 
pētījumu un stratēģiju laboratorija”, 2007).

Along with the above documents the “Procedures 
for Carrying out a Strategic Environmental Impact 
Assessment” were issued by the Cabinet of Ministers of 
the Republic of Latvia in 2004, as amended, specifying 
the types of planning documents requiring a strategic 
assessment, the consultations prior to the commencement 
of the development of these planning documents, 
the information to be included in the environmental 
accounts, the procedure of informing of the public, 
organisations and bodies during the preparation process 
of environmental accounts, the procedure of monitoring 
of the implementation of a planning document, as well 
as the procedures for notification of other states if 
significant transboundary impact is possible, and the 
procedures for informing the European Commission 
(Latvijas Republikas Ministru Kabinets, 2004).

Among the documents adopted by non-governmental 
organizations the Report by NGO of Latvia should be 
mentioned, which stated, inter alia, that it is necessary 
to integrate greenhouse gas stabilization as the basic 
principle in all industries. Another issues covered by 
this report is the necessity to put a greater emphasis on 
an active increase of power efficacy (in particular, in 
relation to household) and the use of renewable power 
resources. The document also mentioned the significance 
of transport sector, which should be considered the most 
critical in the climate policy. According to the report, the 
government should urgently apply both economic and 
legislative limitations for private vehicles, however, at 
the same time, to make public transport more attractive, 
convenient and favourable. In the sector of forestry the 
attraction of greenhouse gases should become one of the 
basic values. Its development may be facilitated both 
by governmental policy in relation to the preservation 
of forests and NGO activities in popularization of this 
idea within the framework of other campaigns related 
to forests. 

Among other problems covered by this document 
the role of waste management was mentioned. The 
report states that willingness of population to reduce 
and separate waste plays a great role in this sphere. 
Though, this requires ability of government and local 
government to arrange systems of waste processing and 
management. 

As a separate issue the problem of raising public 
consciousness in relation to environment and awareness 
of environmental risks was mentioned. This problem 
should be considered as the question of the highest 
importance, since implementation of new legislation 
and policies by government, as well as effective use of 
such legislation and policies shall be possible only with 
active support by population (Brizga J. at all, 2002).

Assessment of environmental awareness 

To provide comprehensive information regarding 
ecological risks and problems in the sphere of 
environment aimed at developing consciousness and 
conduct towards the environmental education, the most 
important task is to duly determine the target auditorium 
and to provide well-to-do quality and quantity of such 
the information. Proper information on the ecology 
will enable the population to orient better in the choice 
of models of consumers’ conduct. The role of the 
governing bodies regarding this issue is in defining 
quality and quantity of the disseminating information in 
respect to the actual ecological problems, initiatives put 
into effect to solve these problems, as well as relating to 
the applicable standards and the environment protection 
rules. One of the most important terms and conditions of 
performing the task is possession of information on the 
current state of information received by the population, 
as well as the extent of perception and awareness of this 
information. Studies on the extent of the population’ 
awareness is a forceful tool for meeting this condition. 

The results of polls of the public opinion are used 
in multiple studies all over the world as the means 
for valuing the population’ position in respect of 
environment protection, as well as for determining the 
level of environmental knowledge and the readiness 
to be armed with facts and figures on the environment 
conduct.

In Europe, for example, there is a research service 
Eurobarometer carrying out studies of the public 
opinion in Europe on a regular basis. Owing to these 
studies since 1982 there has been provided monitoring 
of the attitude of the European population towards the 
environment protection issues. 

In particular, in December 2002 there were made the 
studies under the title “Europeans’ Attitude towards the 
Environment”, which results have shown that the word 
“environment” is associated at the European population 
with a number of notions both negative (pollution, 
catastrophe), as well as positive (landscapes, wildlife 
protection). Regarding environmental conditions 
this research has shown that the mood of optimism 
(“environment pollution may be stopped due to the 
changes happened in people’ way of life”, 45%) is almost 
commensurate with the pessimistic attitude (“a human 
being’ activities caused irreversible consequences for 
the environment”, 44%). Pursuant to the results of 
this research, in the states located in the South of the 
European Union rather than in Northern Europe people 
are more anxious about the ecological risks. The issues 
whereon inhabitants of Europe regard themselves to be 
less informed  (less than 40%), comprise the problems 
that have not been urgent already (for example, acidic 
precipitation) or the problems of industrial nature 
(chemicals, genetically modified organisms, industrial 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

27

by-products). At the same time, about a half of 
respondents specified that they would take any actions 
friendly for the environment; whereas the others marked 
their actions will not play any material role. A major 
share of the respondents considers they are ready to act 
only in the event, if “other people would make efforts”. 
Among the solutions aimed at “the most efficient 
solution of ecological problems” more or less equal 
number of the Europeans named the restrictions (more 
strict regulations), as well as the convincing method 
(“improvement of the general level of environmental 
awareness”) (Eurobarometer, 2002).

Many studies covering the matters on environment 
protection and awareness of ecological risks have been 
also performed in the member-states of the European 
Union.  However, the number and the scope of these 
studies vary from state to state.

For the purposes of this article the Latvian Market 
and Public Opinion Research Centre SKDS in April 
2010 conducted the research, focused on the attitude of 
population towards the issues of environment protection. 
Within the framework of the research a poll was carried 
out among the inhabitants of Latvia aimed at clarifying 
their opinion regarding environment protection, to make 
assessment of the population’ activities aimed at the 
reduction of ecological risks, as well as evaluation of 
the level of environmental risk awareness. 1000 Latvian 
residents from all regions of Latvia at the age from 15 to 
74 participated in this study.

One of the aims of the study was to asses the opinion 
of the population regarding the level of information about 
general environmental issues. In this question only 3.0% 
of the participants indicated that they feel themselves 
very well informed in this field. Rather well informed 
are 41.5% of the respondents. The answer “very badly 
informed” was mentioned in 42.3% cases and 7.2% 
of the participants regard themselves to be very badly 
informed about environmental problems. 6.0% indicated 
that they do not have their opinion regarding this matter 
or cannot answer this question.

Another matter evaluated in the study was the 
awareness level regarding some particular matters of 
environmental protection. According to the results 
of this research the respondents were best informed 
about the quality of drinking water at the place of their 
residents. 14.8% of the participants mentioned that they 
feel themselves very well informed in this field. On the 
other hand, 16.4% of the respondents indicated very 
bad level of information related to this matter. 12.8% 
of the respondents are very well informed about the 
possibilities of waste collection and utilisation at the 
place of residence and 17.7% were very badly informed 
about these possibilities. Very close results were in the 
question regarding the level of information about the 
effect of household chemicals on the environment and 

their effect on human health. Very well informed were 
9.5% and 9.2% respectively and 11.5% and 12.3% in 
each question mentioned that they regard themselves as 
very badly informed about these effects of household 
chemicals. The question about Kyoto protocol have 
shown that 3.7% are well informed about this matter, 
17.7% feel themselves very badly informed, and 27.7% 
of the respondents mentioned that they have not even 
heard about Kyoto protocol.

The results of this study also show a very low level of 
information in such matters as greenhouse gases, Natura 
2000, and Aarhus Convention. In all these answer quite 
a large percent of the respondents (respectively, 27.4%, 
43.9% and 55.5% answered that have not heard about 
these issues.

The purpose of another question in this research was 
to find out, what natural resources people consider to be 
most threatened in Latvia. In this question 79.9% of the 
respondents answered that the most threatened in Latvia 
are forests. Costal area was mentioned in 75.4% cases 
and rivers were indicated by 43.1% of the respondents.

Another question of the study dealt with the opinion 
of the respondents regarding the level of risks caused 
by different aspects. 3.5% of the respondents mentioned 
that growing and cultivation of genetically modified 
plants represent a very high risk in Latvia. External 
environmental risks like the consequences of possible 
environmental accidents in neighbouring countries were 
mentioned in 20.9% cases as being of a very high risk. 
19.0% of the respondents indicated, that they consider 
consequences of possible defects of hydrotechnical 
construction in hydroelectric power plants to constitute 
a very high risk as well. 

In the question about the readiness of the population 
to participate in the activities aimed at the improvement 
of environmental situation 50.2% of the respondents 
mentioned that they would certainly agree to buy and 
use energy saving light bulbs and only 3.1% of the 
participants are certainly not ready to do this. 44.5% 
are certainly ready and 42.4% would rather agree to 
plant trees. Household waste was another issue, where 
Latvian residents appeared to be rather ready to act 
to protect environment. 43.6% indicated that they are 
certainly ready to do this and 43.2% are rather ready to 
adopt sorting their household waste.

The aim of the last question of the survey was to 
find out, whether the Latvian residents consider that 
environmental protection must be a priority in relation 
to economic growth. In this question 34.6% of the 
respondents answered that they think economic growth 
and job creation as more important, even if it causes 
a certain environmental damage. 37.3%, in their turn, 
indicated that environmental protection must be a 
priority, even if it means slower economic growth and a 
loss of a certain number of jobs. 28.1% of the participants 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

28

could not answer this question.
Generalizing the results of this research, it is can be 

said that at present the level of information awareness 
at the population of Latvia regarding the possibilities of 
environment protection is insufficient to put into effect 
all possible measures on the reduction of ecological 
risks. On the other hand, the readiness to act to protect 
the environment, according to the results of this study, is 
rather high (SKDS, 2010).

Viewing the results of the forgoing studies as a 
whole, it is possible to make the conclusion that over 
the past decades information awareness in the sphere 
of environment protection, as well as consciousness of 
ecological risks by the population in many affluent and 
developing countries gradually has grown. People are 
aware of that the concern of the environment protection 
ceased to be the luxury available only for the states with 
developed economy and the ignorance of ecological 
risks in the long-term perspective is related to higher 
costs.

However, it is worth to note that up to now it is still 
insufficient information awareness of the population 
in the sphere of ecological problems. At the same 
time the research in this sphere does not give a full 
idea required for the development of comprehensive 
arrangements, programs, campaigns, which would 
facilitate the development of the conduct of ecological 
consciousness, both among the population masses and 
the top echelon responsible for decision-making in the 
sphere of environment protection.

The efforts focused on a particular target audience 
based on comprehensive information regarding the 
extent of environmental awareness and the level of 
ecological consciousness of the population could 
materially increase the efficiency of application of 
the leverages of law and economy in the sphere of 
environment protection, as well as to drive the population 
to take more active part in the arrangements required for 
environment protection, preservation and recreation of 
the natural resources which in turn, would facilitate to 
providing a sustainable development of each state and 
the world as a whole in prospect.

Conclusions

The theory of the risk society is quite extensively 
investigated all over the world and the results of these 
studies provide a material basis for governments to build 
their policies aimed at ensuring sustainable development 
of the world. However, it is necessary to coordinate the 
activities at all levels in order to succeed in solving this 
task. 

Another essential matter to be taken into account in 
the development of global, national and local policies 
is ecological awareness of population. Raising the 
quality of the information provided to the general public 

in relation to environmental issues would ensure an 
increase of ecological awareness and promote ecological 
consciousness, which in its turn would facilitate the 
attainment of the aims of sustainable development 
by adoption of ecological behaviour and more active 
participation of population in the activities targeted at the 
environment protection and preservation and restoration 
of the natural resources.

References

Beck, U. (1992), Risk Society: Towards a New 
Modernity. London, Sage, 272p.

Beck, U. (1995), Ecological Politics in an Age of Risk. 
Cambridge, Polity Press.

Blok, A. & Jensen, M. (2008), Pesticides in the Risk 
Society: The view from everyday life, Current 
Sociology 56(5), p.757-78. 

Brizga J., Zālīte I., Blūma F., Ozola A., Aistars 
G. (2002), Latvijas NVO ilgtspējīgās attīstības 
ziņojums. Rīga: Zaļā brīvība, 2002, p.39 -45. 

Bruntland, G. (ed.), (1987), Our common future: 
The World Commission on Environment and 
Development, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

EC, Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament 
and the Council of 27 June 2001 on the Assessment 
of the Effects of Certain Plans and Programmes on 
the Environment, 2001.

Edwards, A. L. (2003), Institutional Controls: 
The Converging Worlds of Real Estate and 
Environmental Law and the Role of the Uniform 
Environmental Covenant Act. Connecticut Law 
Review, 35: 1255-1283. 266.

Ekberg, M. (2007), The Parameters of the Risk Society: 
A Review and Exploration, Current Sociology 
55(3): 343-66

Eurobarometer (2002), The Attitudes of Europeans 
towards the Environment. Brussels: Directorate-
General Environment; On-line: europa.eu.int/comm/
public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_180_en.pdf

Giddens, A. (1996), In Defence of Sociology: Essays, 
Interpretations, and Rejoinders. Cambridge, Polity 
Press.

Hood, Christopher, Rothstein, Henry and Baldwin, 
Robert (2001), The Government of Risk: 
Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes. Oxford, 
Oxford University Press.

ICMA (2000), Beyond Fences: Brownfields and the 
Challenge of Land Use Controls. International City/
County Management Association, Washington D.C., 
42495.



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

29

Kostelnik K. M.(2005), An Analysis of Institutional 
Responsibilities for the Long-Term Management 
of Contaminant Isolation Facilities, Nashville, 
Tennessee. On-line: http://etd.library.vanderbilt.
edu/available/etd-03302005-112839/unrestricted/
Kostelnik_Dissertation_Approved_032905.pdf

Latvijas Republikas Ministru Kabinets, Noteikumi 
Nr. 157 “Kārtība kādā veicams ietekmes uz vidi 
stratēģiskais novērtējums”, 2004

Latvijas Republikas Vides ministrija, Latvijas 
ilgtspējīgas attīstības pamatnostādnes, 1998.

Lidskog, Rolf (1996), In Science We Trust? On the 
Relation between Scientific Knowledge, Risk 
Consciousness and Public Trust, Acta Sociologica 
39(1): 31–58.

Mol, Arthur P. J. and Spaargaren, Gert (1993), 
Environment, Modernity and the Risk-Society: The 
Apocalyptic Horizon of Environmental Reform, 
International Sociology 8(4): 431–59.

Public Opinion Research Centre SKDS, Research 
on the opinion of the Latvian society towards the 
environment issues and environmental risks, 2010.

SIA “Analītisko pētījumu un stratēģiju laboratorija”, 
Latvijas ilgspējīgas attīstības stratēģija līdz 
2030.gadam. Pamatziņojums” October 2007. 
On-line: http://www.latvija2030.lv/upload/lias_
pamatzinojums.pdf

UNEP/GCSS.VII/6 (Report of the Governing Council 
on the Work of its Seventh Special Session/Global 
Ministerial Environment Forum), 2002. On-line: 
http://www.unep.org.

Wilkinson, Iain (2001), Social Theories of Risk 
Perception: At Once Indispensable and Insufficient, 
Current Sociology 49(1): 1–22.

The article has been reviewed.

Received in April, 2010; accepted in May, 2010.