Coping with paradoxes of risk communication: Observations and suggestions

Journal Article · Tue Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 1993 · Risk Analysis; (United States)

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01074.x· OSTI ID:6333944

Johnson, B B ^[1]

---

1. New Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection and Energy, Trenton (United States)

The maturation of the field of risk communication has resulted in several manuals, a National Research Council review, a Society for Risk Analysis subgroup, and critics. Critics Pieter-Jan Stalen and Rob Coppock, and Harry Otway and Brian Wynne, have pointed out that much risk communication is impractical or paradoxical. In this letter, the author supports many of the criticisms of these critics, but also discusses errors and omissions in their viewpoints that he feels will inhibit progress in effective risk communication. Topics discussed are motivations for risk communication, the practicality of advice, the audience for risk communication, credibility, and whose interests are best served by risk communication. The purpose of this essay is therefore to spur further debate on the issue of risk communication. 13 refs.

• OSTI ID: 6333944
• Journal Information: Risk Analysis; (United States), Vol. 13:3; ISSN 0272-4332
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

29 ENERGY PLANNING
POLICY AND ECONOMY
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS//MATHEMATICS, COMPUTING, AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
HAZARDS
RISK ASSESSMENT
PUBLIC ANXIETY
EVALUATION
PUBLIC INFORMATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
ERRORS
SOCIOLOGY
INFORMATION
290202* - Energy Planning & Policy- Sociology- (1992-)
290300 - Energy Planning & Policy- Environment
Health
& Safety
552000 - Public Health