Environmental Risk Assessment Reports - Chapter 21

CHAPTER 21 Risk Communication David Weitz and Sally L. Benjamin CONTENTS I. Introduction.................................................................................................426 II. Communicating Risk Assessment Findings and Results...........................426 A. Overcoming the Need to Know Everything ................................426 B. Creating a Meaningful Dialogue..................................................427 C. Planning for Useful Communication ...........................................428 D. Benefits of Early Risk Communication.......................................428 III. Understanding Environmental Risk............................................................428 IV. Turning on the Porch Light — Building Trust..........................................429 V. Managing Risk Communication.................................................................430 A. The REACT Loop Method...........................................................430 1. Media Needs................................................................430 2. Network Contacts ........................................................430 VI. What to Look for When Hiring a Consultant in this Field.......................431 A. Trust..............................................................................................431 B. Training.........................................................................................432 VII. Practical Applications.................................................................................432 VIII. An Abrupt Catastrophe — A Train Derailment, Chemical Plant Leak, or Tire Fire..................................................................................................433 A. Preliminaries.................................................................................433 B. On-Scene Priorities.......................................................................434 1. The Risk Communicator’s Message............................435 2. Others On-Scene..........................................................435 3. Other Benefits of Risk Communication......................435 IX. A Problem Discovered as the Result of Testing — Groundwater Contamination ......................................................................436 X. Conclusion..................................................................................................436 References...................................................................................................437 425 © 2001 by CRC Press LLC 426 A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT REPORTS I. INTRODUCTION Risk communication happens on several levels and requires a multifaceted approach. Of course, to communicate about environmental risk requires technical understand-ing. Risk estimates, behavior and effect of environmental contaminants, and efficacy of remediation strategies are complex subjects and require risk communicators to possess capability in science, as well as communication. It also requires the ability to communicate technical subjects in ordinary terms, but this level is not where risk communication really lives. Risk communication also requires human understanding. What does it feel like to learn that your well has been contaminated? What is your first reaction? What answers are most important? How does the feeling change? What helps? What doesn’t? This understanding is not available through classes or books. It comes from being involved with the people affected by environmental contamination. This chapter introduces both levels of risk communication. First, technical aspects are addressed in the context of communicating risk assessment findings and results. Next, the human aspects of risk communication are presented in the context of coping with three emergency response scenarios. Finally, the two levels are integrated in a discussion of information as one type of control that can be provided to people suffering from a loss of control as a result of environmental contamination. II. COMMUNICATING RISK ASSESSMENT FINDINGS AND RESULTS Often those responsible want to delay risk communication until the end of a project when a “solution” has been decided upon. This is unfortunate. It escalates the emotional reaction of people to the problem and reduces the credibility of the experts. Risk communication, at its best, is an integral part of each step in the process of dealing with an environmental issue — from deciding to perform a risk assessment, through the process of conducting the assessment and making the risk management decision, to the implementation of that decision. A. Overcoming the Need to Know Everything One reason people in charge of a project hesitate to address risk communication throughout every step is that they do not have firm answers. Technical experts are plagued with a desire to answer people’s questions. They prefer not to ever say, “I don’t know,” but that’s exactly what will happen in the early stages of any project. In fact, in the early stages of risk communication, the communication tends to be from lay people to the project managers. Managers will be asking questions and listening to answers at this point, allowing the public to educate them about the site and public perception of the issues. The communication can deal with a variety of topics (see Table 1). © 2001 by CRC Press LLC RISK COMMUNICATION 427 Table 1 Early Information Exchange on a Risk Assessment Project What activities occur at the site? The Site Potential Exposure Local Interest Fear and Concern Logistics of Communication What activities have occurred in the area in the past 50 years? Who uses the site? What do people do on the site? Do children or elderly people live near the site? How long do people usually spend on the site? How many days a year? What groups are interested in the site? Who else is interested in the site? Do people feel that they have enough information about the site/project? What do people know about the project? What worries people about the site/about the project? What information do people need immediately? What are the best times/locations for discussing the project with the people who are concerned? B. Creating a Meaningful Dialogue Over time, there will be opportunities for greater public involvement on certain aspects of the site. The nature of the involvement will depend on the situation. A few examples of public involvement, however, include: · Conducting neighborhood surveys · Simple data collection (e.g., the lake watch techniques in use with volunteers in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and other states) · Values-based issues Values-based issues are really the area where public input can be most valuable. Here lay opinion is as legitimate as the views of technical experts. As other sections of this book have made clear, risk assessment and risk management involve personal and social values, as well as science, math, and technology. The choice of remedi-ation will be a value-ladened choice. Unless a single method is legally mandated, there is probably room for public participation in making a choice about a remedi-ation plan. Similarly, risk levels deemed “of concern” are highly value-laden. Dis-cussions about these choices can be expected to be emotionally charged. The assistance of trained conflict managers and risk communicators will be a great asset to the project staff. It is important, however, for the technical decision makers to participate in the discussions to benefit from the information offered, and to dem-onstrate a genuine concern and interest in the information and ideas concerned laypeople have to offer on the project. © 2001 by CRC Press LLC 428 A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT REPORTS C. Planning for Useful Communication The discussions suggested above must occur in tandem with technical phases of the project to make the best use of citizen information and keep a tight interconnection between the project’s progress and risk communication activities. To do so, it is only necessary to ask what information would be helpful (to people and from people) at each step in the project; consider who would have or need information and how they can be reached; then, simply structure opportunities for effective information exchange. There are myriad techniques from which to choose. Focusing on the goal of effectively communicating with people who care about the project and have some-thing to share will help project staff select techniques tailored to the project needs. D. Benefits of Early Risk Communication Perhaps the most difficult problem in risk communication is cutting through the intense emotions that surround many environmental risks. By informing people completely, early in the project, managers usually can reduce suspicion and conflict. Over a period of time, emotions will usually lessen if people have the opportunity to voice their concerns and feel their views are seriously considered and acted upon by someone in a position to take effective action. Also, emotions will return to a more even temper if people can regain a sense of control over their lives. Learning that your neighborhood, water supply, property, or air has been contaminated shatters the sense of security most people enjoy in their homes. Being allowed to help solve the problem greatly enhances peoples’ recovery from this loss of security because they come to see that there are actions they can take to control the problem. As this happens, fear and anger will subside somewhat and be replaced, in many cases, by fierce interest and a determination to get the job done. Project managers willing to tap into this source of human energy can gain tremendous support. Risk communication is the way to tap into this source of political, financial, and psychological support, by involving the people who care most about the problem. III. UNDERSTANDING ENVIRONMENTAL RISK What then about the unseen, untasted, and unsmelled mystery that may be in the air we breathe or the water we drink? It is a horror left in childhood come back to haunt us; the spirit of the older child taunting at Halloween, that a monster truly does exist behind the bushes; an ethereal thing that has neither form nor substance, but will surely envelop and overcome us. Like the brave, small child who, with lip trembling, moved forward praying silently for Mother to turn on the porch light, today we face environmental contamination with uncertainty and fear hoping for help. Straight talk is the porch light of protection for today’s concerned citizens. In a highly technical world, where gas chromatography measures contaminants in bil-lionths and toxic effects are defined as percentages for chronic impact and acute impact, sometimes honest efforts to communicate only cloud issues. Business leaders, © 2001 by CRC Press LLC RISK COMMUNICATION 429 elected officials, and the people in state and federal agencies attempting to explain issues may fail to communicate with the people as they dance to a fearful tune of legal liability, future damages, and budget uncertainties. A policy of caution is a prescription for failure because it neglects uncertainties which underlie the problem. It fails to respond to the perception of environmental risk, often far more influential than factual analysis. It is not uncommon for an elected official to fear carrying bad news about environmental contamination to the electorate. Few welcome the opportunity to carry bad news. Yet, when news about an environmental problem is carried to the people forthrightly, honestly, and with conviction that all that can be done to remedy the problem will be done speedily, there is seldom a significant adverse reaction from citizens. Problems happen when the porch light is on only fleetingly and people believe they are not getting all the available information. IV. TURNING ON THE PORCH LIGHT — BUILDING TRUST There are some simple rules for building trust. First, do not patronize the people affected. Nearly always, those near a contaminated site will resent any inference that others are best able to decide their future. It is essential to realize that risk communication addresses both the scientifically assessed risks and the perceived risks. People act on perceptions of risk. Individuals who feel at risk will act in accord with that belief, and must be given serious attention. Second, open communication channels and keep them open. Even when there are no new laboratory results, no major discoveries or progress, it is important to continue to report to all those who believe they have a stake in the problem. Whether the problem is being addressed by a business, municipality, or state or federal agency, it is essential that people in the affected community have open avenues both to seek information and to provide it. Third, recognize that risk communication is one piece of a bigger project; that of building a genuine partnership between the contaminated community, elected officials, the business community, and regulatory agencies. If offered merely to placate people, rather than to establish a real working partnership, risk communica-tion can backfire. Citizens will quickly become frustrated, civil actions will spring up against the business or elected officials, and regulatory agencies will heighten enforcement actions or become embroiled in political battles. Fourth, risk communication will not instantly banish the uncertainty, fear, and anxiety of people living with the contamination. Providing the facts about environ-mental contamination and dealing with a sense of helplessness by assisting them in taking control of their destinies are only first steps toward helping them regain their sense of empowerment. Finally, risk communication experts can provide a framework for assessing communications needs, establishing a program to further communication efforts, and assisting in the ongoing effort to “keep the porch light on” as progress is made in resolving the problem. © 2001 by CRC Press LLC ... - tailieumienphi.vn