The use of social sciences in risk assessment and risk management organisations Dr. Cécile WENDLING

Outline The methodology of the study The reason why social sciences are used The different choices to use social sciences Conclusion

Methodology: the cases UK Environment Agency Food Standard Agency Health and Safety Executive GERMANY Bundesamt für Risikobewertung Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz NETHERLANDS RIVM PBL National Health Council US Environmental Protection Agency Food and Drug Administration Department of Energy National Research Council CANADASanté Canada Environnement Canada INSPQ

Why use social sciences ? METHODS – More comprehensive approach of risk – More detailed understanding of uncertainties and ignorances – More robust model LINKS WITH SOCIETY – Better understanding of the fear of people – Better communication with the public – Better influence on behavior – Better inclusion of the civil society SCIENCES AND VALUES – Highlight ethical issues at stake – Highlight political use of the precautionary principle – Distingish scientific debate from political debate ORGANISATIONAL ASPECTS – Better undersand the organisational and institutional context of a risk – Better understand organisational internal aspcets of expertise

CHOICES : Multi or transdisciplinary Multidisciplinary – Risk assessment and Concern assessment Transdisciplinary – Embedded social scientists (synthetic biology)

CHOICES: internalised or outsourced Internalised – RIVM, BfR: social scientists inside the organisation Outsourced – Italy, Canada: Call for research projects, call for expertise

CHOICES: roles To reveal implicit, tacit aspects of risk assessement and risk management (RIVM) To contextualised (HSE) To guarenty the good use of methods, to provide data (FSA)

Different roles Translator: Enhanced communication with stakeholder and communication with the public (BfR) Representative of the minorities (Canada) Educator: educate poeple to risk (Canada)

Different roles Strategic foresight, social awareness: new risks (Austria) Ex post analyser: Lessons learnt (Canada) No role in risk expertise at all, only fundamental research

Different outputs A report on a social aspect of risk (literature review, survey, focus group, delphi, discourse analysis, etc) « Mini check list » or « quick scan » of social aspects to take into account A foresight study on emergent risks Statistical study to help the communication departement or the economic departement of the organisation

Different organisational structures Social sciences department Inside strategy departemnet Inside ethical department Inside communication departement Inside methodology department Social sciences expert panel – Concern assessment panel – Ethic panel Social science research committee

SHS: micro or macro MICRO: focus on individual behavior MACRO: systemic aspect of risks, political aspect of risks

Timing and Social sciences Social sciences before the work start: to work on the framing of the question Social sciences during the expertise: to highlight social aspects of risk Social sciences after the work is done: to better communicate with the public and the stakeholders

Conclusion Difficulties and frustrations – No clear understanding of the added value – Organisational culture which is not favorable to social sciences – Difficulty to recognise the validity of qualitative work – Few resources Opportunities – The head of the organisation – The double curriculum option – The existence of a crisis – Role of training