The Public and Public Relations: Examining their nexus in environmental pollution, laws, and policies of government

Goals 6, 13, 14, and 15 of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) share global concerns of making the earth cleaner for human habitation. In Nigeria, pollution thrives despite the government's laws and policies. In the country, opinions on public issues are strong, and public relations (PR) professionals are perceived moulders of societal viewpoints. This study examines the connection between public awareness and PR actions on the sociological problems of environmental pollution, laws, and government policies in an industrial cum residential community in Southwest Nigeria. Based on the Environmental Communication Theory, which espouses nature-human environmental connectivity, this study adopts a quantitative, non-experimental, and descriptive methodology. Probability and non-probability sampling design and multi-stage techniques are applied to select 400 residents of Ota community. Scientific Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) is used to process 358 successful copies of the questionnaire. Results show that public awareness of environmental pollution is high; but low on its laws and policies. The contributions of public relations practitioners are acknowledged, but the government's actions are unfamiliar. Meagre public concern for environmental laws and policies and weak motivation by PR practitioners and the government threaten the achievement of identified SDGs of the UN at the study's location.


Introduction
Public relations (PR) is an essential component of communication that strategically seeks to influence behaviour change on essential health, education, and the environment. This type of communication aims to transfer information about organizations' reputation, interests, be impacted or endangered by human activities. Across both summations, the environment's protection is paramount, which further stresses the need for policies.
Nigerian environmental policies have been reflected in different legislations before and after independence, with some of them as Forestry Regulations 1943, The Water Resources Control Law 1963, Harmful Waste Degree of 1988, etc. [5]. Different states took the initiative after the Federation had instituted the policies [14,23,27].
Environmental communication theory comprises human-nature relations [15]. The theory asserts that information impacts on how humans perceive their immediate environment. Humans react to the information that they receive and form opinions based on the environment around them. It means that the public understands government messages on environmental pollution, laws, and policies is critical because it determines their behaviour. The government is encouraging environmental advocacy and bringing about pollution prevention reduction plan for a safer society by enacting these laws. Then again, government laws and policies could be overly prescriptive and hard to follow. As such, public relations activities such as community relations, media relations, sponsorship, and partnership with corporate organizations, trade fairs, exhibitions, sports, among others, could be promising avenues for government to employ when sending out these kinds of information. In other words, the messages should be packaged in ways that would encourage citizen participation in environmental management and protection.
Furthermore, the public's understanding of environmental pollution, laws, and policies is influenced by a belief system based on their exposure to environmental concerns, impacting their understanding and reception of such messages. Thus, the government needs to take into consideration cultural factors, education, media, interpersonal networks, reasoning patterns, sociocultural beliefs, and motivation when packaging their message.

Method
This study adopted a cross-sectional non-experimental research design. The quantitative approach, specifically, the questionnaire, was adopted to gather relevant data. The rationale for this is to allow for detailed descriptions and perspectives on the issues raised. This study was situated in Ota, a significant city in Ogun State-one of the five southwestern states in Nigeria. Due to urbanization and the growing influx of people, many pockets of informal settlements and slums have emerged in addition to few Government Residential Areas and other Middle Areas.
The study examined the role of Public relations on Ota residents' awareness of environmental laws and policy on pollution and waste management. Ota is the industrial hub of the Ado Odo-Ota Local Government Area (LGA) of Ogun State, Nigeria. Ota community is within the 16 wards in Ado Odo-Ota local government area (LGA), with an estimated population of 526,565 residents was covered for the study [22,31,32]. The massive presence of manufacturing industries and the rising human population that supply the labour for the industries partly explains the volume of waste generated in the area.
Based on the fact that the study intends to investigate participants from three different locations with varying features, both probability, and non-probability sampling designs were adopted. The sample selection process was through a multi-stage sampling technique. In the first stage, Ado-Odo Ota local government was purposively selected because it is the most industrialized and densely-populated semi-urban centre in Nigeria [22,31,32]. In the second stage, the study area, which comprises an Area Council, was stratified into three clusters encompassing an industrial suburb, middle residential area, and slum settlements. The justification for stratifying the area into clusters is for all desired characteristics of the study location to be accommodated. In the third and final stage, a simple random sampling technique was adopted to select respondents from the study location's three settlements.
The Simple Random formula used in this study is the sample size (n) of the population (f<0.05}, factoring a 95% level of confidence (z) based on the population size (N). The maximum population variability is p=q=0.5, giving a <5% sampling error produced by 400 respondents.
A semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect quantitative data on participants' information and their socio-demographics. The returned copies of the questionnaire were edited to check for and minimize errors. Copies of the questionnaire with incomplete information were discarded while completed ones were coded for analysis.

Results and discussion
Five (5) questions in Table 1 were used to compute the public's summary responses on environmental pollution, laws, and policies of the government. The groups were divided into three: those who do (Yes), those who don't (No), and those who are undecided (Not sure). Total 358 100% Table 1 shows that only 314 respondents or 87.7% agreed that they are aware of public relations, while 26 respondents or 7.3% disagreed, and only 18 or 5% were not sure of their awareness of public relations. Similarly, 307 respondents or 85.7% agreed that they are aware of pollution in their environment. In comparison, 34 respondents or 9.5% disagreed, and only 17 or 4.8% were not sure of their awareness of pollution in the communities. The table also indicated that only 128 respondents or 35.7% agreed that they are aware of environmental law or policy. In comparison, 167 respondents or 46.7% disagreed, and only 63 or 17.6% were not sure of the established environmental law or policy. Table 1 also shows the understanding and perception of the public on environmental pollution. One hundred fourteen respondents or 31.8% viewed environmental pollution as garbage by the roadside, 77 respondents or 21.5% said industrial smoke, 76 respondents or 21.2% perceived it as garbage in waterways, 44 respondents or 12.3% sees environmental pollution as noise in public places, 25 respondents or 7% viewed it as throwing waste out of moving vehicles. In comparison, 16 respondents or 4.5% said none of the above, and only six respondents or 1.7% chose all of the above.
Another question in Table 1 emphasized how often the waste in and around the environment is disposed of. 34.4% or 123 respondents affirmed that the disposal is often done once in a week; 63 or 17.6% said once a day, 60 or 16.8% said once a month, 50 or 14% said twice a month, 45 or 12.6% said once a day as opposed to 4.7% representing 17 respondents who said never.  Table 2 shows the understanding and perception of public relations. One hundred five respondents or 29.3% viewed public relations as talking about organizations, 82 respondents or 22.9% said image-making, 62 respondents or 17.3% perceived it as none of the above, 30 respondents or 8.4% sees public relations as giving out gifts, 28 respondents or 7.8% viewed it as making friends, while others constituting 51 or 14.2% respondents see public relations as dressing well, receiving visitors, and walking for life.
The respondents were also asked to identify some of the public relations activities they observed in their communities. 33.8% or 121 respondents identified environmental cleaning, 60 or 16.8% opposed with none of the above, 74 or 20.7% affirmed that PR activities in their community focused on public enlightenment campaigns, 54 or 15.1% said donation of waste bin, 29 or 8.1% said digging of boreholes, while 11 or 3.1% chose free distribution of dust masks and only 9 or 2.5% said the building of waste collection centres. This implied that the community members are, to some extent, aware of the activities that PR professionals/practitioners engage in.
Three (3) questions in Table 2 were used to compute the summary response on environmental pollution, laws, and policies. The groups were divided into three: those who do (Yes), those who don't (No), and those who are undecided (Not sure). Table 2 also shows that only 298 respondents or 83.2% agreed that environmental management should be a public relations activity while 26 respondents or 7.3% disagreed; only 34 or 9.5% were unsure whether environmental management should be included in public relations activities. Moreover, the table also indicated that only 269 respondents or 75.2%, agreed that public relations people should inform the citizens about environmental laws and policy. In comparison, 41 respondents or 11.4% disagreed, and only 48 or 13.4% were not sure of the statement. To conclude, the table also indicated that 109 respondents or 30.4% agreed that public relations activities aided awareness of this law or policy. In comparison, 128 respondents or 35.8% disagreed, and only 121 or 33.8% were not sure that public relations activities have contributed to the awareness of environmental law or policy. Two (2) questions in Table 3 were used to compute the summary response to the government's PR activities' public assessment on environmental pollution, laws, and policies. The groups were divided into three: those who do (Yes), those who don't (No), and those who are undecided (Not sure). Table 3 shows that only 238 respondents or 66.5% agreed that they are aware of their community's public relations activity. In comparison, 69 respondents or 19.3% disagreed, and only 51 or 14.2% were not sure of their awareness of public relations activities. Additionally, the table also indicated that only 136 respondents or 38%, agreed that they are aware of the steps taken by government officials to inform the people about environment pollutions, laws, and policy. In comparison, 133 respondents or 37.1% disagreed and only 89 or 24.9% were not sure of the established environmental law or policy.  Table 4 shows that only 156 respondents or 43.6% agreed that they are aware of their community's public relations activity. In comparison, 105 respondents or 29.3% disagreed, and only 97 or 27.1% were not sure of their awareness of public relations activities. Additionally, the table also indicated that only 141 respondents or 39.4% agreed that corporate organizations help inform the community about environmental laws and policy. In comparison, 113 respondents or 31.6% disagreed, and only 104 or 29% were not sure of the roles of corporate organizations.in informing the community on the benefits of environment laws and policy.

Conclusion
Following this study's outcome, there is the need for government to take the campaigns on environmental pollution, laws, and policies to the political ward levels. It will inspire the people to own the advocacy and become proactive in a renewed attitude towards environmental laws and policies. This conversion of existing political wards to environmental advocacy clusters at the various grassroots level can be referred to as the Back to the Roots Programme. Direct supervision and leadership of these clusters by the government at the wards and grassroots will yield more success in driving the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals.
This study identifies what is regarded as Environmental Terrorism. The phenomenon refers to all forms of intentional abuse, exploitation, and injurious action against the land, water, and air. Primary forms of environmental terrorism include open defecation/urination, indiscriminate dumping of refuse in waterways, bush burning, deforestation, soil excavation, and gas flaring. Unabashed refuse dumping, for example, blocks drainages and makes the large parts of the study area prone to floods perennially. Industrial fumes and gas flaring due to the huge presence of manufacturing industries in Ota, the study location was another severe concern brought to the fore in this study. Additionally, bush burning, deforestation for housing projects, and heavy-duty constructions, excavating natural soil for mining purposes is a daily occurrence in Ota. It also explains the need for more stringent measures by the grass-root government in terms of fines and community service for culprits to ensure compliance.
Also, there is the need for more awareness of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to the public from the 1st to the 17th goal, which could be translated to local languages for broader coverage and accessibility. Notably is the need for the SDG goals to be taught at all levels, across gender and income barriers at the grassroots level. The need for a collective effort on all the stakeholders (residents, individuals, groups, organizations, governments, and NGOs) is strongly advocated for a more positive outcome and results.