"Down and Dirty:" The Use and Abuse of Public Trust in Risk Communication

Many recent contributions to risk communication research stress the importance of the element of "trust" in the process of successful communication. This paper uses that theme in considering risk communication within the context of seeking consensus on matters of health and environmental risk controversies through stakeholder negotiation. It suggests that there are very good reasons, based on historical experience, for the parties to mistrust each other deeply in such settings. For example there is abundant evidence involving episodes in which risk promoters have concealed or ignored relevant risk data or simply have sought to advance their own interests by selective use of such data. These well-established practices compound the difficulties other stakeholders face, in all such negotiation, by virtue of the inescapable uncertainties (as well as absence of needed data) inherent in risk assessments. These factors encourage the participants to treat such negotiations as poker games in which bluffing, raising the ante, and calling the perceived bluffs of others are matters of survival. In the end we should recognize the genuine dilemmas that citizens face in trying to figure out who and what to believe in making sensible decisions among the range of risks, benefits, and tradeoffs that confront us.     

Risk Communication in The Netherlands: The Monitored Introduction of the EC "Post-Seveso" Directive

Implementation of article 8.1 of the EC-"Seveso" Directive (82/501/EC) is now under way in many countries in Europe. In The Netherlands, the implementation of the Directive started with a carefully monitored introduction of active information provision at two sites (Dordrecht and Elst). This introduction was supported by a multidisciplinary research group. This group helped to develop the risk communication program and also played a role in the evaluation of the program. This paper describes these processes and their evaluation. We will focus on the design of the risk communication programs and the effects of the programs on knowledge and attitudes of the local target groups. This effort and its results clearly started an institutional learning process involving governmental bodies at several organizational levels (local, regional, and national), and industrial organizations (individual firms and organizations of industries). Monitoring the design, the implementation, and the effects of active information provision proves an effective means to gain experience with the implementation of the Seveso Directive and could help to facilitate further implementation.     

Why Rules for Risk Communication Are Not Enough: A Problem-Solving Approach to Risk Communication

Current work on risk communication offers practitioners helpful guidelines and rules such as "speak clearly" and "speak with compassion." While important, these guidelines have limitations. They offer practitioners and scholars little aid in determining why a communication encounter failed. Also, they do not help practitioners anticipate and overcome likely difficulties in future risk situations, nor can they help locate information about how to reduce these difficulties. To overcome the limitations of rule-based approaches to risk communication, this paper describes a diagnostic or problem-solving approach. This approach maintains that instead of rules, people need bases for anticipating likely obstacles to effective communication and selecting approaches that reduce these difficulties. Research on building trust, increasing awareness, deepening comprehension, gaining agreement, and motivating action is available in fields such as communication, educational psychology, science education, marketing, counseling, negotiation, and disaster response. This paper describes a framework that assists scholars and practitioners in: (a) identifying communication goals; (b) determining principal obstacles to those goals; and (c) selecting research-based methods for overcoming or minimizing these difficulties and achieving communication objectives.     

Risk to Groundlings of Death Due to Airplane Accidents: A Risk Communication Tool

During the period 1975-85 in the United States the 70 year lifetime risk of dying from being hit by an airplane when the individual is on the ground was 4.2 per million people. In contrast to many other risks used for comparison purposes, risk to those on the ground from an airplane crash is not a function of our own skills; is not optional; provides no benefit to anyone involved; and is not an act of nature. As a risk comparison tool it also has the useful characteristics of being something about which we can agree that regulatory action, such as control of airplane use and traffic, is warranted; but that no significant change in personal behavior, such as living in the basement to protect against dying from a plane hitting the home, is commensurate with the extent of risk.     

The Nevada Initiative: A Risk Communication Fiasco

The U.S. Congress has designated Yucca Mountain, Nevada as the only potential site to be studied for the nation's first high-level nuclear waste repository. People in Nevada strongly oppose the program, managed by the U.S. Department of Energy. Survey research shows that the public believes there are great risks from a repository program, in contrast to a majority of scientists who feel the risks are acceptably small. Delays in the repository program resulting in part from public opposition in Nevada have concerned the nuclear power industry, which collects the fees for the federal repository program and believes it needs the repository as a final disposal facility for its high-level nuclear wastes. To assist the repository program, the American Nuclear Energy Council (ANEC), an industry group, sponsored a massive advertising campaign in Nevada. The campaign attempted to assure people that the risks of a repository were small and that the repository studies should proceed. The campaign failed because its managers misunderstood the issues underlying the controversy, attempted a covert manipulation of public opinion that was revealed, and most importantly, lacked the public trust that was necessary to communicate credibly about the risks of a nuclear waste facility.     

Risk Communication and Foodborne Illness: Message Sponsorship and Attempts to Stimulate Perceptions of Risk

Foodborne illness represents a serious health hazard in the United States. Since foodborne illness can often be prevented by an individual's behavior, messages aimed at promoting safe food-handling behaviors should be a major tool to reduce the incidence of foodborne illness. This article argues that to achieve adoption of safe food-handling practices in the home, food-safety messages should both stimulate risk perceptions and promote self-efficacy, feelings that one can successfully enact recommended behaviors. A content analysis of nationally distributed food-safety messages questioned if messages incorporated these features. Since food-safety communicators operate in complex environments with multiple and sometimes competing objectives, this study also questioned if sponsorship of foodborne illness prevention messages was related to the amount of content designed to alter risk perceptions associated with foodborne illness. Results of the quantitative content analysis found that copywriters generally included content designed to stimulate risk perception about foodborne illness but virtually ignored self-efficacy needs of the audience. A marked difference in tendencies to stimulate risk perceptions was found based on sponsorship. Both in volume and proportion, results show that governmentally sponsored messages more aggressively attempted to heighten risk perceptions associated with foodborne illness than did messages sponsored by privately funded communicators.     

Unquestioned Answers or Unanswered Questions: Beliefs About Science Guide Responses to Uncertainty in Climate Change Risk Communication

In two experimental studies we investigated the effect of beliefs about the nature and purpose of science (classical vs. Kuhnian models of science) on responses to uncertainty in scientific messages about climate change risk. The results revealed a significant interaction between both measured (Study 1) and manipulated (Study 2) beliefs about science and the level of communicated uncertainty on willingness to act in line with the message. Specifically, messages that communicated high uncertainty were more persuasive for participants who shared an understanding of science as debate than for those who believed that science is a search for absolute truth. In addition, participants who had a concept of science as debate were more motivated by higher (rather than lower) uncertainty in climate change messages. The results suggest that achieving alignment between the general public's beliefs about science and the style of the scientific messages is crucial for successful risk communication in science. Accordingly, rather than uncertainty always undermining the effectiveness of science communication, uncertainty can enhance message effects when it fits the audience's understanding of what science is.     

公益事件营销中企业—消费者契合度和宣传侧重点影响效果研究

随着消费者逐渐认可和接受企业的社会公益营销行为,公益事件营销已经成为企业新的营销手段和平台。在确定了三种契合度的相对重要性后,研究基于社会认同理论和归因理论,重点考察契合度与宣传侧重点的交互效应。研究1利用正交实验设计和联合分析方法确定三种契合度中企业—消费者的契合度对消费者的态度作用最重要。研究2采用2x3组间实验设计和多元方差分析方法分析了契合度和宣传侧重点(企业、事件、均衡)对公益事件态度、品牌态度和购买行为的交互作用。研究结果发现,不仅契合度和宣传侧重点各自对消费者行为和态度的主效应显著,二者的交互效应也显著。研究结论对企业进行公益事件营销时如何定位首选契合度,营销沟通中如何权衡宣传侧重点有明确的指导意义。     

Risk Communication and Social Choices: The Discussion Heats Up

Environmental Hazards: Communicating Risks as a Social Process Sheldon Krimsky and Alonzo Plough Dover, MA: Auburn House Publishing Co.     

The Evolving Field of Risk Communication

The 40th Anniversary of the Society for Risk Analysis presents an apt time to step back and review the field of risk communication. In this review, we first evaluate recent debates over the field's current state and future directions. Our takeaway is that efforts to settle on a single, generic version of what constitutes risk communication will be less productive than an open-minded exploration of the multiple forms that comprise today's vibrant interdisciplinary field. We then review a selection of prominent cognitive, cultural, and social risk communication scholarship appearing in the published literature since 2010. Studies on trust in risk communication messengers continued to figure prominently, while new research directions emerged on the opportunities and critical challenges of enhancing transparency and using social media. Research on message attributes explored how conceptual insights particularly relating to framing, affective and emotional responses, and uncertainty might be operationalized to improve message effectiveness. Studies consistently demonstrated the importance of evaluation and how varying single attributes alone is unlikely to achieve desired results. Research on risk communication audiences advanced on risk perception and multiway engagement with notable interest in personal factors such as gender, race, age, and political orientation. We conclude by arguing that the field's interdisciplinary tradition should be further nurtured to drive the next evolutionary phase of risk communication research.     

The Decline of Deference: The Political Context of Risk Communication

Risk communication is seen as an important adjunct to the process of siting locally noxious facilities. To understand how risk communication might function in such a process, one needs to understand the political context that gives rise to public opposition to such facilities in the first place. This analysis draws on a variety of data to describe the decline of deference, a situation in which a hostile and alienated public is mobilized primarily through ad hoc voluntary organizations, and is increasingly reluctant to defer important decisions to institutional elites. Risk communication programs must be designed to offset the trends that result in the decline of deference. This conclusion differs markedly from the conventional wisdom that risk communication is merely a device for providing information to citizens so sthat they may make more rational decisions.     

Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment

At the request of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Research Council (NRC) recently completed a major report, Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment, that is intended to strengthen the scientific basis, credibility, and effectiveness of risk assessment practices and subsequent risk management decisions. The report describes the challenges faced by risk assessment and the need to consider improvements in both the technical analyses of risk assessments (i.e., the development and use of scientific information to improve risk characterization) and the utility of risk assessments (i.e., making assessments more relevant and useful for risk management decisions). The report tackles a number of topics relating to improvements in the process, including the design and framing of risk assessments, uncertainty and variability characterization, selection and use of defaults, unification of cancer and noncancer dose‐response assessment, cumulative risk assessment, and the need to increase EPA's capacity to address these improvements. This article describes and summarizes the NRC report, with an eye toward its implications for risk assessment practices at EPA.     

The Role of Emotions in Risk Communication

We present two experiments investigating the role of emotions concerning technological and natural hazards. In the first experiment, technological hazards aroused stronger emotions, and were considered to be riskier than natural hazards. No differences were found between the texts versus audio presentations. However, the presence of pictures aroused stronger emotions and increased the perceived risk. Emotions play a mediating role between hazard types and perceived risk, as well as between pictures and perceived risk. The second experiment adopted real‐world materials from webpages and TV. Emotions again play a mediating role between pictorial information and risk perception. Moreover, specific emotions were found to be associated with different types of action tendencies. For example, loss‐based emotions (e.g., fear, regret) tend to lead to prevention strategies, whereas ethical emotions (e.g., anger) lead to aggressive behavior. We also find that loss‐based emotions in the technical hazard scenario trigger more coping strategies (from prevention to retaliation) than in the natural hazard scenario.     

Industry Response to SARA Title III: Pollution Prevention, Risk Reduction, and Risk Communication

This paper reports results from a survey designed to: (1) evaluate changes in industrial pollution prevention practices since the passage of the landmark environmental legislation, the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986, also known as SARA Title III, and (2) identify those factors that may contribute to an industrial facility engaging in pollution prevention and risk communication activities. The survey was conducted under a Cooperative Agreement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Columbia University Center for Risk Communication. Evidence from the survey indicates that a wide variety of waste and pollution reduction activities have been undertaken since passage of the Act. Virtually all facilities surveyed in the pulp and paper, chemical, and petroleum and refining industries reported that they had reduced pollutants or wastes on at least one often measures, including reducing toxic air emissions. Most facilities indicated paying more attention to pollution prevention activities as a result of SARA Title III and half reported that their communication activities have also increased.     

Inductive Risk,Science, and Values: A Reply to MacGillivray

The argument from inductive risk (AIR) is perhaps the most common argument against the value-free ideal of science. Brian MacGillivray rejects the AIR (at least as it would apply to risk assessment) and embraces the value-free ideal. We clarify the issues at stake and argue that MacGillivray's criticisms, although effective against some formulations of the AIR, fail to overcome the essential concerns that motivate the AIR. There are inevitable trade-offs in scientific enquiry that cannot be resolved with any formal methods or general rules. Choices must be made, and values will be involved. It is best to recognize this explicitly. Even so, there is more work to be done developing methods and institutional support for these choices.