Expert Views on Their Role as Policy Advisor: Pilot Study for the Cases of Electromagnetic Fields,Particulate Matter,and Antimicrobial Resistance

This perspective presents empirical data to demonstrate the existence of different expert views on scientific policy advice on complex environmental health issues. These views are partly research‐field specific. According to scientific literature, experts differ in the way they provide policy advice on complex issues such as electromagnetic fields (EMF), particulate matter (PM), and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Where some experts feel their primary task is to carry out fundamental research, others actively engage in the policy dialogue. Although the literature provides ideas about expert roles, there exists little empirical underpinning. Our aim is to gather empirical evidence about expert roles. The results of an international study indicated that experts on EMF, PM, and AMR differ in the way they view their role in the policy dialogue. For example, experts differed in their views on the need for precaution and their motivation to initiate stakeholder cooperation. Besides, most experts thought that their views on the risks of EMF/PM/AMR did not differ from those of colleagues. Great dissensus was found in views on the best ways of managing risks and uncertainties. In conclusion, the theoretical ideal–typical roles from the literature can be identified to a certain extent.     

Engaging with Comparative Risk Appraisals: Public Views on Policy Priorities for Environmental Risk Governance

Communicating the rationale for allocating resources to manage policy priorities and their risks is challenging. Here, we demonstrate that environmental risks have diverse attributes and locales in their effects that may drive disproportionate responses among citizens. When 2,065 survey participants deployed summary information and their own understanding to assess 12 policy‐level environmental risks singularly, their assessment differed from a prior expert assessment. However, participants provided rankings similar to those of experts when these same 12 risks were considered as a group, allowing comparison between the different risks. Following this, when individuals were shown the prior expert assessment of this portfolio, they expressed a moderate level of confidence with the combined expert analysis. These are important findings for the comprehension of policy risks that may be subject to augmentation by climate change, their representation alongside other threats within national risk assessments, and interpretations of agency for public risk management by citizens and others.     

Risks Perception of Electromagnetic Fields in Taiwan: The Influence of Psychopathology and the Degree of Sensitivity to Electromagnetic Fields

Little is known about the perceived health risks of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and factors associated with risk perception in non‐Western countries. Psychological conditions and risk perception have been postulated as factors that facilitate the attribution of health complaints to environmental factors. This study investigated people's perceived risks of EMFs and other environmental sources, as well as the relationships between risk perception, psychopathology, and the degree of self‐reported sensitivity to EMFs. A total of 1,251 adults selected from a nationwide telephone interviewing system database responded to a telephone survey about the relationships between environmental sources and human health. The interview included questions assessing participants’ psychiatric conditions and the presence and degree of sensitivity to EMFs. One hundred and seventy participants were self‐identified as having sensitivity to EMFs, and 141 met the criteria for psychiatric conditions without EMF sensitivity. More than half of the survey respondents considered power lines and mobile phone base stations to affect people's health to a big extent. Higher sensitivity to EMFs, psychopathology, being female, being married, more years of education, and having a catastrophic illness had positive associations with perceived risks of EMF‐related environmental sources as well as for all environmental sources combined. We observed no moderating effect of psychopathology on the association between degree of sensitivity to EMF and risk perception. Thus, psychopathology had influence on general people's risk perception without having influence on the relationship between people's degree of sensitivity to EMF and risk perception. The plausible explanations are discussed in the text.     

Perception of Risks From Electromagnetic Fields: A Psychometric Evaluation of a Risk-Communication Approach

Potential health risks from exposure to power-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) have become an issue of significant public concern. This study evaluates a brochure designed to communicate EMF health risks from a scientific perspective. The study utilized a pretest-posttest design in which respondents judged various sources of EMF (and other) health and safety risks, both before reading the brochure and after. Respondents assessed risks on dimensions similar to those utilized in previous studies of risk perception. In addition, detailed ratings were made that probed respondents' beliefs about the possible causal effects of EMF exposure. The findings suggest that naive beliefs about the potential of EMF exposure to cause harm were highly influenced by specific content elements of the brochure. The implications for using risk-communication approaches based on communicating scientific uncertainty are discussed.     

Explosion Probability of Unexploded Ordnance: Expert Beliefs

This article reports on a study to quantify expert beliefs about the explosion probability of unexploded ordnance (UXO). Some 1,976 sites at closed military bases in the United States are contaminated with UXO and are slated for cleanup, at an estimated cost of $15–140 billion. Because no available technology can guarantee 100% removal of UXO, information about explosion probability is needed to assess the residual risks of civilian reuse of closed military bases and to make decisions about how much to invest in cleanup. This study elicited probability distributions for the chance of UXO explosion from 25 experts in explosive ordnance disposal, all of whom have had field experience in UXO identification and deactivation. The study considered six different scenarios: three different types of UXO handled in two different ways (one involving children and the other involving construction workers). We also asked the experts to rank by sensitivity to explosion 20 different kinds of UXO found at a case study site at Fort Ord, California. We found that the experts do not agree about the probability of UXO explosion, with significant differences among experts in their mean estimates of explosion probabilities and in the amount of uncertainty that they express in their estimates. In three of the six scenarios, the divergence was so great that the average of all the expert probability distributions was statistically indistinguishable from a uniform (0, 1) distribution—suggesting that the sum of expert opinion provides no information at all about the explosion risk. The experts' opinions on the relative sensitivity to explosion of the 20 UXO items also diverged. The average correlation between rankings of any pair of experts was 0.41, which, statistically, is barely significant (p= 0.049) at the 95% confidence level. Thus, one expert's rankings provide little predictive information about another's rankings. The lack of consensus among experts suggests that empirical studies are needed to better understand the explosion risks of UXO.     

Which Paradigm for Managing the Risk of Ionizing Radiation?

This article tackles the problem of controversies expressed by experts in the field of estimating and managing ionizing radiation risks. We analyze the paradigms that were conceived on this subject, in particular the studies carried out by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), as well as the papers stating either that the effect of low doses is relatively weak or, on the contrary, relatively serious. Uncertainties, which taint the risk estimations, assume a particular importance because they are at the origin of the request for expert and value judgments and represent the critical point of the discussions on the ionizing radiation risks. Our study allows us to look further into the problem of the paradigm's formation, uncertainties, and expert and value judgments, and provides areas for consideration that may contribute to a better understanding of certain gridlocks in the decision-making process, as regards to environmental, health, and energy policies.     

Prioritizing Environmental Health Risks in the UAE

This article presents the results of a comparative environmental risk‐ranking exercise that was conducted in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to inform a strategic planning process led by the Environment Agency‐Abu Dhabi (EAD). It represents the first national‐level application of a deliberative method for comparative risk ranking first published in this journal. The deliberative method involves a five‐stage process that includes quantitative risk assessment by experts and deliberations by groups of stakeholders. The project reported in this article considered 14 categories of environmental risks to health identified through discussions with EAD staff: ambient and indoor air pollution; drinking water contamination; coastal water pollution; soil and groundwater contamination; contamination of fruits, vegetables, and seafood; ambient noise; stratospheric ozone depletion; electromagnetic fields from power lines; health impacts from climate change; and exposure to hazardous substances in industrial, construction, and agricultural work environments. Results from workshops involving 73 stakeholders who met in five separate groups to rank these risks individually and collaboratively indicated strong consensus that outdoor and indoor air pollution are the highest priorities in the UAE. Each of the five groups rated these as being among the highest risks. All groups rated soil and groundwater contamination as being among the lowest risks. In surveys administered after the ranking exercises, participants indicated that the results of the process represented their concerns and approved of using the ranking results to inform policy decisions. The results ultimately shaped a strategic plan that is now being implemented.     

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.     

Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective

Why do countries regulate, or prefer to regulate, environmental health risks such as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and endocrine disruptors differently? A wide variety of theories, models, and frameworks can be used to help answer this question, though the resulting answer will strongly depend on the theoretical perspective that is applied. In this theoretical review, we will explore eight conceptual frameworks, from different areas of science, which will offer eight different potential explanations as to why international differences occur in environmental health risk management. We are particularly interested in frameworks that could shed light on the role of scientific expertise within risk management processes. The frameworks included in this review are the Risk Assessment Paradigm, research into the roles of experts as policy advisors, the Psychometric Paradigm, the Cultural Theory of Risk, participatory approaches to risk assessment and risk management, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Social Amplification of Risk Framework, and Hofstede's Model of National Cultures. We drew from our knowledge and experiences regarding a diverse set of academic disciplines to pragmatically assemble a multidisciplinary set of frameworks. From the ideas and concepts offered by the eight frameworks, we derive pertinent questions to be used in further empirical work and we present an overarching framework to depict the various links that could be drawn between the frameworks.     

Hazard Perception, Risk Perception, and the Need for Decontamination by Residents Exposed to Soil Pollution: The Role of Sustainability and the Limits of Expert Knowledge

This case study examines the hazard and risk perception and the need for decontamination according to people exposed to soil pollution. Using an ecological-symbolic approach (ESA), a multidisciplinary model is developed that draws upon psychological and sociological perspectives on risk perception and includes ecological variables by using data from experts' risk assessments. The results show that hazard perception is best predicted by objective knowledge, subjective knowledge, estimated knowledge of experts, and the assessed risks. However, experts' risk assessments induce an increase in hazard perception only when residents know the urgency of decontamination. Risk perception is best predicted by trust in the risk management. Additionally, need for decontamination relates to hazard perception, risk perception, estimated knowledge of experts, and thoughts about sustainability. In contrast to the knowledge deficit model, objective and subjective knowledge did not significantly relate to risk perception and need for decontamination. The results suggest that residents can make a distinction between hazards in terms of the seriousness of contamination on the one hand, and human health risks on the other hand. Moreover, next to the importance of social determinants of environmental risk perception, this study shows that the output of experts' risk assessments—or the objective risks—can create a hazard awareness rather than an alarming risk consciousness, despite residents' distrust of scientific knowledge.     

Embedding Expertise for Policy Responses to COVID-19: Comparing Decision-Making Structures in Two Federal Democracies

Public Organization Review - The COVID-19 crisis focused attention on how experts from different scientific fields provided advice to governments through expert committees and task forces. We...     

Managing Potential Health Risks from Electric Powerlines: A Decision Analysis Caught in Controversy

Over the past 20 years, several epidemiological studies have found an association between exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and health effects, including childhood leukemia and adult brain cancer. However, experts strongly disagree about whether this association is causal and, if so, how strong it is. In this article, we examine several alternatives to reduce EMFs from sources of the California power grid, including undergrounding distribution and transmission lines and reconfiguring or rephasing lines. The alternatives were evaluated in terms of the potential health risk reduction, cost, impacts on service reliability, property values, and many other consequences. Because of the uncertainty about an EMF-health link, the main effort was to determine the sensitivity of the decisions to the probability and seriousness of an EMF hazard. User-friendly computer models were developed to allow stakeholders to change the model assumptions and parameters to analyze the impacts of their own assumptions and estimates on the decision. The analysis clearly demonstrated that only four of the many concerns raised by the stakeholders could make a difference in the decision: health risks, costs, service reliability, and property values. Whether undergrounding, moderate alternatives for EMF reduction, or no change was the best decision depended on a few key factors, including the probability that EMF exposure is a hazard, the severity of this hazard, how the EMF reduction measures are financed, and the impacts on property values. While the analysis did not resolve the EMF issues, it showed that even in the most controversial settings, a little analysis goes a long way to clarifying the issues and to focus the debate.     

Modeling for insights,not numbers: the experiences of the energy modeling forum

It has often been contended that the primary goal of policy modeling should be the insights quantitative models can provide, not the precise-looking projections—i.e. numbers—they can produce for any given scenario. Students of the energy policy process, in particular, have noted that preoccupation with the plethora of detailed quantitative results produced by large-scale computer models has substantially impeded their influence on key policy decisions. The creation of the Energy Modeling Forum (EMF) at Stanford University in 1976 represents one potential remedy for that situation. The EMF was formed to foster better communication between the builders and users of energy models in energy planning and policy analysis. The EMF operates through ad hoc working groups, composed of national and, more recently, international energy modeling and policy experts. These working groups conduct studies concentrating on a single energy topic. The diversity of backgrounds of the working group members ensures that the language of the EMF studies is English, not computer. Each working group identifies existing models relevant to the study's focus. A series of tests is then designed by the group to illuminate the models' basic structure and behavior. A comparison of results is published in a widely distributed report that identifies the models' strengths and weaknesses in the context of the study's topic. Seven EMF studies have been initiated to date: (1) Energy and the economy, (2) Coal in transition, (3) Electric load forecasting, (4) Aggregate elasticity of energy demand, (5) US oil and gas supply, (6) World oil and (7) Macroeconomic impacts of energy shocks. Each EMF study has broadened the understanding of the nature of the relevant policy issues and the models that have been, are, or could be used to address them. The present paper describes how each study's key insights were developed in the context of a simplified analytical framework that provided the proper perspective for understanding the model results.     

Risk Perception in the U.K. Oil and Gas Production Industry: Are Expert Loss‐Prevention Managers' Perceptions Different From Those of Members of the Public?

This article investigates potential differences in risk perception between experts (loss-prevention managers in the U.K. oil and gas production industry) and nonexperts (managers and students). Extant research on expert versus nonexpert perceptions of risk is reviewed, followed by the present study concerning risk perceptions of seven pen-picture scenarios involving the occurrence of hazardous events in the U.K. oil and gas production industry. In contrast to many of the earlier studies of expert versus nonexpert perceptions of risk, the present analysis concludes that experts did not judge the overall riskiness of the portrayed hazardous events as less risky than the nonexperts. Nevertheless, the experts believe more strongly than our nonexperts that the risks portrayed in the scenarios pose little threat to future generations, are more precisely known, and are relatively controllable. Use of multiple regression analysis to help uncover the basis of overall riskiness assessments for expert and lay respondents was inconclusive, however. Finally, little evidence was found that nonexperts were any more heterogeneous in their risk perceptions than experts. It may be that the nature of the risks assessed in the present study may account for the general lack of clear expert versus nonexpert differences in overall perceptions of the riskiness of hazardous events in the North Sea. Earlier findings of strong expert versus nonexpert differences in risk perception assessed hazards of major public concern. It is inferred that using such extreme hazards may have resulted in an exaggerated view of differences in expert versus public (nonexpert) perception of risk.     

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.     

Classification of Listeria monocytogenes Persistence in Retail Delicatessen Environments Using Expert Elicitation and Machine Learning

Increasing evidence suggests that persistence of Listeria monocytogenes in food processing plants has been the underlying cause of a number of human listeriosis outbreaks. This study extracts criteria used by food safety experts in determining bacterial persistence in the environment, using retail delicatessen operations as a model. Using the Delphi method, we conducted an expert elicitation with 10 food safety experts from academia, industry, and government to classify L. monocytogenes persistence based on environmental sampling results collected over six months for 30 retail delicatessen stores. The results were modeled using variations of random forest, support vector machine, logistic regression, and linear regression; variable importance values of random forest and support vector machine models were consolidated to rank important variables in the experts’ classifications. The duration of subtype isolation ranked most important across all expert categories. Sampling site category also ranked high in importance and validation errors doubled when this covariate was removed. Support vector machine and random forest models successfully classified the data with average validation errors of 3.1% and 2.2% (n = 144), respectively. Our findings indicate that (i) the frequency of isolations over time and sampling site information are critical factors for experts determining subtype persistence, (ii) food safety experts from different sectors may not use the same criteria in determining persistence, and (iii) machine learning models have potential for future use in environmental surveillance and risk management programs. Future work is necessary to validate the accuracy of expert and machine classification against biological measurement of L. monocytogenes persistence.     

Deliberative Disjunction: Expert and Public Understanding of Outcome Uncertainty

Many environmental and risk management decisions are made jointly by technical experts and members of the public. Frequently, their task is to select from among management alternatives whose outcomes are subject to varying degrees of uncertainty. Although it is recognized that how this uncertainty is interpreted can significantly affect decision‐making processes and choices, little research has examined similarities and differences between expert and public understandings of uncertainty. We present results from a web‐based survey that directly compares expert and lay interpretations and understandings of different expressions of uncertainty in the context of evaluating the consequences of proposed environmental management actions. Participants responded to two hypothetical but realistic scenarios involving trade‐offs between environmental and other objectives and were asked a series of questions about their comprehension of the uncertainty information, their preferred choice among the alternatives, and the associated difficulty and amount of effort. Results demonstrate that experts and laypersons tend to use presentations of numerical ranges and evaluative labels differently; interestingly, the observed differences between the two groups were not explained by differences in numeracy or concerns for the predicted environmental losses. These findings question many of the usual presumptions about how uncertainty should be presented as part of deliberative risk‐ and environmental‐management processes.     

Social Contagion of Risk Perceptions in Environmental Management Networks

An important requisite for improving risk communication practice related to contentious environmental issues is having a better theoretical understanding of how risk perceptions function in real‐world social systems. Our study applied Scherer and Cho's social network contagion theory of risk perception (SNCTRP) to cormorant management (a contentious environmental management issue) in the Great Lakes Basin to: (1) assess contagion effects on cormorant‐related risk perceptions and individual factors believed to influence those perceptions and (2) explore the extent of social contagion in a full network (consisting of interactions between and among experts and laypeople) and three “isolated” models separating different types of interactions from the full network (i.e., expert‐to‐expert, layperson‐to‐layperson, and expert‐to‐layperson). We conducted interviews and administered questionnaires with experts (e.g., natural resource professionals) and laypeople (e.g., recreational and commercial anglers, business owners, bird enthusiasts) engaged in cormorant management in northern Lake Huron (n = 115). Our findings generally support the SNCTRP; however, the scope and scale of social contagion varied considerably based on the variables (e.g., individual risk perception factors), actors (i.e., experts or laypeople), and interactions of interest. Contagion effects were identified more frequently, and were stronger, in the models containing interactions between experts and laypeople than in those models containing only interactions among experts or laypeople.     

Structured expert elicitation about Listeria monocytogenes cross-contamination in the environment of retail deli operations in the United States

Listeria monocytogenes is among the foodborne pathogens with the highest death toll in the United States. Ready‐to‐eat foods contaminated at retail are an important source of infection. Environmental sites in retail deli operations can be contaminated. However, commonly contaminated sites are unlikely to come into direct contact with food and the public health relevance of environmental contamination has remained unclear. To identify environmental sites that may pose a considerable cross‐contamination risk, to elucidate potential transmission pathways, and to identify knowledge gaps, we performed a structured expert elicitation of 41 experts from state regulatory agencies and the food retail industry with practical experience in retail deli operations. Following the “Delphi” method, the elicitation was performed in three consecutive steps: questionnaire, review and discussion of results, second questionnaire. Hands and gloves were identified as important potential contamination sources. However, bacterial transfers to and from hands or gloves represented a major data gap. Experts agreed about transfer probabilities from cutting boards, scales, deli cases, and deli preparation sinks to product, and about transfer probabilities from floor drains, walk‐in cooler floors, and knife racks to food contact surfaces. Comparison of experts' opinions to observational data revealed a tendency among experts with certain demographic characteristics and professional opinions to overestimate prevalence. Experts’ votes clearly clustered into separate groups not defined by place of employment, even though industry experts may have been somewhat overrepresented in one cluster. Overall, our study demonstrates the value and caveats of expert elicitation to identify data gaps and prioritize research efforts.     

Intuitive Toxicology: Expert and Lay Judgments of Chemical Risks

Human beings have always been intuitive toxicologists, relying on their senses of sight, taste, and smell to detect harmful or unsafe food, water, and air. As we have come to recognize that our senses are not adequate to assess the dangers inherent in exposure to a chemical substance, we have created the sciences of toxicology and risk assessment to perform this function. Yet despite this great effort to overcome the limitations of intuitive toxicology, it has become evident that even our best scientific methods still depend heavily on extrapolations and judgments in order to infer human health risks from animal data. Many observers have acknowledged the inherent subjectivity in the assessment of chemical risks and have indicated a need to examine the subjective or intuitive elements of expert and lay risk judgments. We have begun such an examination by surveying members of the Society of Toxicology and the lay public about basic toxicological concepts, assumptions, and interpretations. Our results demonstrate large differences between toxicologists and laypeople, as well as differences between toxicologists working in industry, academia, and government. In addition, we find that toxicologists are sharply divided in their opinions about the ability to predict a chemical's effect on human health on the basis of animal studies. We argue that these results place the problems of risk communication in a new light. Although the survey identifies misconceptions that experts should clarify for the public, it also suggests that controversies over chemical risks may be fueled as much by limitations of the science of risk assessment and disagreements among experts as by public misconceptions.