Risky Business: Involving the Public in Environmental Decision Making Kirk Riley Great Lakes & Mid-Atlantic Center for Hazardous Substance Research Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan

TOSC Program Technical Outreach Services for Communities Provides assistance at high-profile contaminated sites Builds public capacity for participating in site cleanup decisions

Tonight’s Topics Public involvement in environmental decision making Understanding risk perception Communicating with non-expert audiences Informing, educating and empowering And not panicking Practitioners’ perspective--government, consultant, etc.

Risk Communication A science-based approach for communicating effectively in High-concern Sensitive or Controversial situations

What is Risk? R = H x P x O Risk equals Hazard x Probability x Outrage

The Essential Ingredient: Trust Nothing kills trust like lack of caring Except LOOKING like you don’t care, which kills it exactly the same way

The Competence/Empathy Paradox Empathy Competence

The Essential Ingredient: Trust Trust—without it, no communication happens Trust—without it, small mistakes get magnified Trust—without it, all your hard work may be rejected Trust—without it, knowledge and expertise don’t matter Trust—with it, mistakes may be overlooked or minimized Trust—with it, community acceptance becomes more likely

Why Involve The Public? The public has more power than you (or I) realize Public involvement is essential to project success It may be required by law!

Steps to Community Involvement Understand your community Understand human nature Communicate!

Understand Your Community: What are the Hot Issues? Technical issues/concerns Non-technical issues/concerns Community goals, attitudes, history, leadership

Risk Perception Public’s views of risk may differ from experts’ views Public perception of risk affected by factors outside of traditional risk analysis

Factors Affecting Public Perception of Risk Voluntary or involuntary risk (smoking vs. air pollution) Immediate effects or delayed effects (benzene combustion vs. benzene inhalation; smoking) Natural or artificial (naturally occurring carcinogens vs. artificial carcinogens) Controlled by individual or controlled by someone else (driving vs. flying)

Factors Affecting Public Perception of Risk (cont’d) Familiar or unfamiliar (farmer vs. non-farmer with ag chemicals) The “dread’ factor; usually associated with very complex technologies (e.g., nuclear power) Risk provides visible benefits or does not provide visible benefits (polluter who provides jobs for community)

The Risk Paradox Technical experts focus on hazard and misperceive (ignore) outrage Public focuses on outrage and misperceives hazard

When To Use Risk Communication High Concern High Trust (essential) Low Concern Low Trust (recommended) High Concern Low Trust (essential) Low Concern High Trust (optional)

When To Use Risk Communication (cont’d) When public input is needed When the public has the ability to stop a project When public concern is high When public trust is low

How Do We Know? Surveys Case Studies Experimental field testing of messages/ messenger characteristics Practitioner experience

Three Key Risk Communication Messages P = R Perception = Reality G = T + K Goal = Trust + Knowledge C = C 2 Communication = Credibility x Competence

Four Main Theories In Risk Communication Mental Noise Theory Risk Perception Theory Trust Determination Theory Negative Dominance Theory

Four Main Theories Mental Noise Theory People who are upset have difficulty hearing and processing information

Communication: Processing Effectiveness 0100 Mental noise can reduce the ability to process communication (i.e., understanding) up to 80% 20%

Limited Information Attention/ Retention In High Concern Situations Reasons For 20% Efficiency Denial of issue Trauma from issue Competing agenda Emotional arousal

Implications of Limited Attention/ Retention In High Concern Situations Limited number of messages are accepted Time limitations on communications Message repetition is important

Active Listening Skills Paraphrasing Feedback Control of non-verbals

Non-Verbal Communication Low Trust and/or High Concern Provides up to 50-75% of message content Noticed Intensely by audience Interpreted negatively Overrides verbal communication

Non-Verbal Communication Body Language Examples Eyes Hands Posture

Four Main Theories Risk Perception Theory Perception equals reality What is perceived as real is real in its consequences

Perception Of Risk Weighting Factors Factor Weight Trust………………………..… Benefit……………………..… Control (Voluntary)…….…… Fairness (Share)…………….… 500

Four Main Theories Trust Determination Theory The goal of risk communication is to earn trust and gain credibility

Trust and Credibility Factors Empathy/Caring Competence/Expertise Honesty/Openness Dedication/Commitment

Trust Determination Factors In High Concern Situations

Trust Determination Factors In Low Concern Situations

Trust/Credibility Credibility Transference “A lower credibility source takes on the credibility of the highest credibility source that agrees with its position on an issue”

Trust/Credibility Credibility Reversal “When a lower credibility source disagrees with a higher credibility source, the lower credibility source loses further credibility”

Trust /Credibility Credibility Reversal (cont’d) “The only information source that can effectively attack the credibility of another source is one of equal or higher credibility.”

Negative Dominance Theory People who are upset tend to think negatively Four Main Theories

Negative Communication Boosts Negative Perception N = 3P One negative = three positives

Negatives Repetition of a negative A negative repeated (e.g., allegation or accusation), even when refuted, results in reinforcement and affirmation of the negative

Negative Words to Avoid No Shouldn’t/Don’t/Can’t/Won’t Never Nothing None

Consensus-Building Language Positive Questioning Conditional Appreciative

Effective Communication Sincere Clear Admit constraints & uncertainty Perceived to be all those things Wanted

How Do We Build Trust? Accept the public as a legitimate partner Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts Listen to the public’s specific concerns Listen again Be honest, frank and open Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources

How Do We Build Trust? Commitment Promise only what you can do Be helpful and go the distance Be accessible Speak clearly and with compassion Develop a thick skin

How Do We Build Trust? Demonstrating Knowledge Let people know your experience Let people know your background Let people know what you don’t know

How Do We Build Trust? Demonstrating Openness Know what people may want from you Think about what you can give Get agreement internally

How Do We Build Trust? Demonstrating Empathy Put yourself in their surroundings Listen and acknowledge what people are feeling Express your reactions or feelings

Principles of Risk Communication: the Old View Decide, announce, defend All we have to do is get the numbers right All we have to do is tell them the numbers All we have to do is explain what we mean by the numbers

Principles of Risk Communication: the Old View (cont’d) All we have to do is show them that they’ve accepted similar risks in the past All we have to do is treat them nice All we have to do is make them partners

Risk Communication: a Revised View Citizens want to be partners Participants in risk communication need to represent diverse interests Those individuals most at risk may be underrepresented: those of differing ethnicities, races, and incomes Informal communication methods are as important as formal methods

Community Involvement Plan Know your community Know your community leaders Define and organize stakeholder groups Design communication based on knowledge of the community

Community Involvement What role should the public have? How can public participation be best organized and facilitated? What is the best way to communicate with the public?