European Public Perceptions of Food Risk: Cross-National and Methodological Comparisons

This article presents a comparative study of public perceptions of food risk across 25 European member states. A secondary data analysis is conducted on a Eurobarometer survey fielded to nationally representative samples in 2005. The survey included closed questions as well as free associations to map risk perceptions. Taking a quantitative approach, we find that people in a majority of European countries express similar levels of concern about food risks. However, outside this majority a North-South divide is evident, with the Northern countries worrying less than the Southern countries. Multilevel modeling shows that cross-national differences in individual respondents' level of worry are in part attributable to shared country effects and to generalized risk sensitivity about a range of personal risks. On the underlying structure of food risk concerns, factor analysis points to three dimensions described by groupings of risks related to adulteration and contamination, health effects, and production and hygiene. A qualitative analysis of respondents' free associations about problems and risks with food identifies three major themes that are consistent with the quantitative results. However, the free associations also point toward greater cross-national diversity and to striking variations in the range and importance of food risks. Overall, the picture is of a public that frames food risks in a wider context of beliefs about the links between diet and health. We conclude with some implications for research on food risk perceptions in particular and risk perception studies in general.     

The Uncertainty of Nanotoxicology: Report of a Society for Risk Analysis Workshop

A September 2008 workshop sponsored by the Society for Risk Analysis⁽ 1 ⁾ on risk assessment methods for nanoscale materials explored “nanotoxicology” in risk assessment. A general conclusion of the workshop was that, while research indicates that some nanoscale materials are toxic, the information presented at the workshop does not indicate the need for a conceptually different approach for risk assessment on nanoscale materials, compared to other materials. However, the toxicology discussions did identify areas of uncertainty that present a challenge for the assessment of nanoscale materials. These areas include novel metrics, characterizing multivariate dynamic mixtures, identification of toxicologically relevant properties and “impurities” for nanoscale characteristics, and characterizing persistence, toxicokinetics, and weight of evidence in consideration of the dynamic nature of the mixtures. The discussion also considered “nanomaterial uncertainty factors” for health risk values like the Environmental Protection Agency's reference dose (RfD). Similar to the general opinions for risk assessment, participants expressed that completing a data set regarding toxicity, or extrapolation between species, sensitive individuals, or durations of exposure, were not qualitatively different considerations for nanoscale materials in comparison to all chemicals, and therefore, a “nanomaterial uncertainty factor” for all nanomaterials does not seem appropriate. However, the quantitative challenges may require new methods and approaches to integrate the information and the uncertainty.     

Risk Analysis in Developing Countries1

In summary, risk analysis is not yet well practiced in developing countries, although there are numerous, diverse environmental and other risk-related issues and concerns that need attention. A few initiatives have been taken, but, so far, they have created only relatively small impact in a few areas. Many risk issues may not be addressed, partly as a result of lack of resources and inadequate knowledge by policy makers. Risk analysis is an essential tool for the planning and implementation of development projects. To enhance its use, however, risk analysis approaches and methods must be adapted to developing countries, and this requires research. Unfortunately, funds for research, in general, are hard to find. There are other problems in the implementation of risk analysis. Trained professionals on risk analysis are few. Existing institutions that are tasked with resolving environmental and other risk issues are overburdened. Risk-related data are sorely lacking. Resources are very limited for addressing numerous natural and technological hazards. In most developing countries, political and economic stability is still threatened by both internal and external forces, hence, that is what receives priority attention. Activities like risk analysis, which generally lead to long-term results and benefits, do not get enough interest. In addition, there is still little public awareness of risks even among those who have passed the stage of survival; thus, there is little public concern about them. We cannot afford this lack of concern for long. In the Philippines, the government was the first to recognize after our peaceful revolution in 1986 that “the environmental issues can add fuel to the insurgency; they can also hamper efforts towards national recovery”.⁽⁴⁾ To this point, I have added that risk management (including risk assessment and risk communication), like attainment of peace and freedom, is a social imperative because risk issues affect our health, safety, and both our physical and economic well-being.⁽⁷⁾ Many of such issues in developing countries have not only local, but also global origin and impacts. They thus deserve the interest of each of us.     

What Defines Us as Professionals in the Field of Risk Analysis?

In a recent issue of Risk Analysis, the then‐President of the Society for Risk Analysis (SRA), Pamela Williams, has some interesting reflections about the risk analysis field. She states that the ability and desire to tackle difficult problems using a risk analytical approach is what uniquely defines us as professionals in the field of risk analysis. The point of departure for her discussion is interviews with the plenary speakers of the 2014 SRA Annual Meeting, who addressed two divisive topics: hydraulic fracking and marijuana use. She points to several themes that invite contributions from the field of risk analysis, including: Has the full spectrum of potential risks and benefits been identified and weighted, and what are the risk tradeoffs or countervailing risks? Inspired by Williams's reflections, and by analyzing the issues raised in the interviews, this article seeks to clarify what our field is really providing. A main conclusion of the article is that it is essential to acknowledge that professionals in the field of risk analysis merely support the tackling of such problems, and that their genuine competence—that which distinguishes them from other professionals—lies in the risk analytical approach itself.     

From Breeder Reactors to Butterflies: Risk, Culture, and Biotechnology

Social theories of risk suggest that a combination of scientific and cultural perspectives converge to influence risk perception. This article first surveys sociological perspectives suggesting that risks from modern technological development have become predominant concerns in the social consciousness. Particular attention is given to those theses describing how social elements work to create perception of risks in relation to new technologies. The themes that emerge from this survey are then related to contemporary debates concerning biotechnology. Specific attention is given to recent controversies regarding genetically modified crops, and parallels are drawn between debates over nuclear power and biotechnology. A procedural ethic for public discourse and decision making over the diffusion of genetically modified foods is offered. Ethical and social theories are linked with the hope that by recognizing the social dimensions of debates over new technologies a broader framework for conducting risk analysis may emerge.     

Perception of Ecological Risk to Water Environments

This paper examines lay and expert perceptions of the ecological risks associated with a range of human activities that could adversely affect water resource environments. It employs the psychometric paradigm pioneered in characterizing perceptions of human health risks, which involves surveys to obtain judgments from subjects about risk items in terms of several important characteristics of the risks. The paper builds on a previous study that introduced ecological risk perception. This second study employs a larger, more diverse sample, a more focused topic area, and comparisons between lay and expert judgments. The results confirm that a small set of underlying factors explain a great deal of variability in lay judgments about ecological risks. These have been termed Ecological Impact, Human Benefits, Controllability , and Knowledge. The results are useful in explaining subjects' judgments of the general riskiness of, and need for regulation of, various risk items. The results also indicate several differences and areas of agreement among the lay and expert samples that point to potential key issues in future ecological risk management efforts for water resources.     

The Social Construction of Risk in a Rural Community: Responses of Local Residents to the 1990 Hagersville (Ontario) Tire Fire

This paper presents the findings of research relating to the 1990 Hagersville (Ontario) tire fire. After reviewing the literature on risk and risk perception, it begins by describing the event as well as the community in which it occurred. The reasons for adopting a qualitative research design are then established practical, conceptual, and methodological. The residents' accounts of the fire, evacuation, and aftermath in terms of concerns, anxieties, and responses are described. Five themes emerge: economic, community, health, environmental, and governance. The paper concludes by putting forward a case study-derived model of risk appraisal and management, and by relating the findings to policy issues.     

Elicitation of Expert Judgments of Uncertainty in the Risk Assessment of Herbicide-Tolerant Oilseed Crops

One of the lay public's concerns about genetically modified (GM) organisms (GMO) and related emerging technologies is that not all the important risks are evaluated or even identified yet--and that ignorance of the unanticipated risks could lead to severe environmental or public health consequences. To some degree, even the scientists who participated in the analysis of the risks from GMOs (arguably the people most qualified to critique these analyses) share some of this concern. To formally explore the uncertainty in the risk assessment of a GM crop, we conducted detailed interviews of seven leading experts on GM oilseed crops to obtain qualitative and quantitative information on their understanding of the uncertainties associated with the risks to agriculture from GM oilseed crops (canola or rapeseed). The results of these elicitations revealed three issues of potential concern that are currently left outside the scope of risk assessments. These are (1) the potential loss of the agronomic and environmental benefits of glyphosate (a herbicide widely used in no-till agriculture) due to the combined problems of glyphosate-tolerant canola and wheat volunteer plants, (2) the growing problem of seed lot contamination, and (3) the potential market impacts. The elicitations also identified two areas where knowledge is insufficient. These are: the occurrence of hybridization between canola and wild relatives and the ability of the hybrids to perpetuate themselves in nature, and the fate of the herbicide-tolerance genes in soil and their interaction with soil microfauna and -flora. The methodological contribution of this work is a formal approach to analyzing the uncertainty surrounding complex problems.     

Improving Risk Communication

This paper explores reasons for difficulties in communicating risks among analysts, the laypublic, media, and regulators. Formulating risk communication problems as decisions involving objectives and alternatives helps to identify strategies for overcoming these difficulties. Several strategies are suggested to achieve risk communication objectives like improving public knowledge about risks and risk management, encouraging risk reduction behavior, understanding public values and concerns, and increasing trust and credibility.     

The Power of Perception: Health Risk Attributed to Air Pollution in an Urban Industrial Neighbourhood

This paper describes a multi-stakeholder process designed to assess the potential health risks associated with adverse air quality in an urban industrial neighborhood. The paper briefly describes the quantitative health risk assessment conducted by scientific experts, with input by a grassroots community group concerned about the impacts of adverse air quality on their health and quality of life. In this case, rather than accept the views of the scientific experts, the community used their powers of perception to advantage by successfully advocating for a professionally conducted community health survey. This survey was designed to document, systematically and rigorously, the health risk perceptions community members associated with exposure to adverse air quality in their neighborhood. This paper describes the institutional and community contexts within which the research is situated as well as the design, administration, analysis, and results of the community health survey administered to 402 households living in an urban industrial neighborhood in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. These survey results served to legitimate the community's concerns about air quality and to help broaden operational definitions of health. In addition, the results of both health risk assessment exercises served to keep issues of air quality on the local political agenda. Implications of these findings for our understanding of the environmental justice process as well as the ability of communities to influence environmental health policy are discussed.     

Variability and Uncertainty Meet Risk Management and Risk Communication

In the past decade, the use of probabilistic risk analysis techniques to quantitatively address variability and uncertainty in risks increased in popularity as recommended by the 1994 National Research Council that wrote Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment. Under the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act, for example, the U.S. EPA supported the development of tools that produce distributions of risk demonstrating the variability and/or uncertainty in the results. This paradigm shift away from the use of point estimates creates new challenges for risk managers, who now struggle with decisions about how to use distributions in decision making. The challenges for risk communication, however, have only been minimally explored. This presentation uses the case studies of variability in the risks of dying on the ground from a crashing airplane and from the deployment of motor vehicle airbags to demonstrate how better characterization of variability and uncertainty in the risk assessment lead to better risk communication. Analogies to food safety and environmental risks are also discussed. This presentation demonstrates that probabilistic risk assessment has an impact on both risk management and risk communication, and highlights remaining research issues associated with using improved sensitivity and uncertainty analyses in risk assessment.     

Perceived Risks of Radioactive Waste Transport Through Oregon: Results of a Statewide Survey

Transportation of hazardous materials, and particularly radioactive wastes, on public highways has become an important risk management issue. The unfavorability of public attitudes regarding hazardous and nuclear wastes signals the potential for strong public opposition to programs for transporting these materials. This paper presents the results of a survey conducted to assess public reactions to a long-term nuclear waste transport program planned to follow a route through a portion of rural Oregon. The survey assessed a number of key risk perception issues, including perceived health and safety risks of nuclear waste transport, relative risks of transport vs. storage at an existing site, trust in state officials, and satisfaction with life in communities along the transport route. The survey identified a number of attitudes and concerns that need to be understood and considered by those in charge of designing and implementing the waste-transportation program.     

Risk and Benefit Perceptions of Mobile Phone and Base Station Technology in Bangladesh

Research in developed countries showed that many citizens perceive that radio signals transmitted by mobile phones and base stations represent potential health risks. Less research has been conducted in developing countries focused on citizen perceptions of risks and benefits, despite the recent and rapid introduction of mobile communication technologies. This study aims to identify factors that are influential in determining the tradeoffs that Bangladeshi citizens make between risks and benefits in terms of mobile phone technology acceptance and health concerns associated with the technology. Bangladesh was selected as representative of many developing countries inasmuch as terrestrial telephone infrastructure is insubstantial, and mobile phone use has expanded rapidly over the last decade, even among the poor. Issues of importance were identified in a small‐scale qualitative study among Bangladeshi citizens (n = 13), followed by a survey within a sample of Bangladeshi citizens (n = 500). The results demonstrate that, in general, the perceived benefits of mobile phone technology outweigh the risks. The perceived benefits are primarily related to the social and personal advantages of mobile phone use, including the ability to receive emergency news about floods, cyclones, and other natural disasters. Base stations were seen as a symbol of societal advance. The results furthermore suggest that overall risk perceptions are relatively low, in particular health risks, and are primarily driven by perceptions that related to crime and social inconvenience. Perceived health risks are relatively small. These findings show that risk communication and management may be particularly effective when contextual factors of the society where the system is implemented are taken into consideration.     

Baseline Risk and Preference for Reductions in Risk-to-Life

The typical model of individual attitudes toward risk-to-life suggests that an individual's willingness to pay for a reduction in mortality risk increases with the baseline risk. The higher-baseline hypothesis has been the subject of several empirical tests but results have so far been mixed. Using survey evidence, we present a situation in which subjects do prefer to reduce risks for which the baseline is higher. This finding is robust to several alternative explanations. Survey responses reflect subjects'concerns about government effectiveness in risk reduction, environmental effects associated with the various hazards, and other idiosyncratic elements of the risks; however, these concerns appear to occur in addition to, not in lieu of, the preference to reduce higher risks.     

Principles for Conduct of Pest Risk Analyses: Report of an Expert Workshop

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) have focused attention on risk assessment of potential insect, weed, and animal pests and diseases of livestock. These risks have traditionally been addressed through quarantine protocols ranging from limits on the geographical areas from which a product may originate, postharvest disinfestation procedures like fumigation, and inspections at points of export and import, to outright bans. To ensure that plant and animal protection measures are not used as nontariff trade barriers, GATT and NAFTA require pest risk analysis (PRA) to support quarantine decisions. The increased emphasis on PRA has spurred multiple efforts at the national and international level to design frameworks for the conduct of these analyses. As approaches to pest risk analysis proliferate, and the importance of the analyses grows, concerns have arisen about the scientific and technical conduct of pest risk analysis. In January of 1997, the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis (HCRA) held an invitation-only workshop in Washington, D.C. to bring experts in risk analysis and pest characterization together to develop general principles for pest risk analysis. Workshop participants examined current frameworks for PRA, discussed strengths and weaknesses of the approaches, and formulated principles, based on years of experience with risk analysis in other setting and knowledge of the issues specific to analysis of pests. The principles developed highlight the both the similarities of pest risk analysis to other forms of risk analysis, and its unique attributes.     

One Agency's Use of Risk Assessment and Risk Communication1

Few organizations have the courage to evaluate their own use of risk assessment (identifying hazards and estimating their probability and magnitude) and risk communication (interacting with internal and external stakeholder groups about risks). The USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) wants to enhance its overall risk analysis process for managing a wide range of risks to animals, plants, and human health. We gathered survey data for a baseline of APHIS professionals’ understanding and use of risk assessment and risk communication. APHIS professionals spend a surprisingly large share of their time communicating about risks. They perceive that risk estimates influence decisions, but that risk estimates should have more influence. Respondents reported little opposition to APHIS risk management decisions, and little use of channels such as USDA Extension Service for disseminating risk messages. Substantial variance across responses is explained mostly by differences in the roles of the 11 work units (now 10) within the agency. Location also contributes to the variance. Demographic variables seem less important.     

Radon Risk Information and Voluntary Protection: Evidence from a Natural Experiment

This study examines the perceived risks and mitigating behavior of Maine households who received new information on their exposures to significant health risks from indoor radon. The observed responses of these households illustrate conceptual issues related to designing an effective risk information program. Despite the involvement of generally well-motivated homeowners and well-intentioned researchers and government officials, we conclude that the risk information approach used in Maine failed to induce appropriate, cost-effective voluntary protection. The results indicate that, after receiving radon test results, information on associated health risks, and suggestions on how to reduce exposures: perceived risks tended to understate objective risks by orders of magnitude, and there was no statistically significant relationship between mitigating behavior and objective risks. These results suggest that the formation of risk perceptions and subsequent behavioral adjustments involve complex interactions among information, contextual, socioeconomic, and psychological variables. Therefore, government programs that seek to reduce health and safety risks with information programs, instead of using more conventional enforced standards, must be crafted very carefully to accommodate this complex process.