1. Transparency, Risk Communication and Stakeholder Engagement for a Diverse Audience in the 21 st Century Ruth Hull & Josephine Archbold Intrinsik Environmental Sciences Inc, Toronto, Canada May 16 th, 2012

2. Presentation Outline Transparency Risk Communication Stakeholder Engagement Tools and Approaches Conclusions 2 Effective Stakeholder Participation in Decision-Making Stakeholder engagement Risk communication Transparency

3. Transparency is critical to fostering TRUST 3 PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS ABOUT HYDRAULIC FRACTURING % Very concerned Somewhat concerned Not very concerned Impacts on the environment 404416 Impacts on water quality 354025 Lack of disclosure 563212 Source: Energy Institute, Univ. of TX@ Austin, Feb,. 2012 “Trust arrives on foot and departs on horseback”. Alexander Pechtold, Minister for Government Reform and Kingdom Relations, The Netherlands 3

4. Transparency – Case Study Smelter risk assessments: two very similar risk assessments, in two jurisdictions (different regulators, different industrial companies) No disclosure of data to public until study complete; PAC (selected); Adversarial positioning; Lack of trust between stakeholders. 4 Full disclosure of data throughout the process; PAC (open), TAC; Co-operative positioning; Broad trust and support from stakeholders.

5. Risk Communication Resources ATSDR. 1993. A Primer on Risk Communication: Principles and Practice. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/risk/riskprimer/index.html http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/risk/riskprimer/index.html Bennett and Calman. 1999. Risk Communication and Public Health. Oxford University Press. New York. Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. 2011. Gateway to Health Communication & Social Marketing Practice. http://www.cdc.gov/healthcommunication/Risks/index.html http://www.cdc.gov/healthcommunication/Risks/index.html Fitzpatrick-Lewis et al. 2010. Communication of Environmental health risks: A systematic review. Environmental Health. 9:67 Health Canada. 2006. Strategic Risk Communications Framework. http://www.riskcommunications.gc.ca http://www.riskcommunications.gc.ca

6. Risk Communication Key principles: Delivered by trusted source Tailor messages to audience(s) Based on best available evidence Use visuals and text Use multiple channels to reach audience(s) Provide opportunity to interact (Qs and As) Clear and accessible language 6 Fitzpatrick-Lewis et al. 2010. Communication of Environmental health risks: A systematic review. Environmental Health. 9:67

7. Stakeholder Engagement National Institute of Health. 2011. Principles of Community Engagement. 2 nd Edition. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/communityengagement/index.html http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/communityengagement/index.html Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. 2008. Public Participation Guidance. http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/ Health Canada Public Involvement Policy and Resources. 2007. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/public-consult/res-centre/poli- eng.php http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/public-consult/res-centre/poli- eng.php International Association for Public Participation. (IAP2). www.iap2.org www.iap2.org

8. Stakeholder Engagement Core Values: Those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process. The public's contribution will influence the decision. Promotes sustainable decisions by recognizing and communicating the needs and interests of all participants. Seeks input from participants in designing how they participate. Provides participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way. Communicates to participants how their input affected the decision. Seeks out and facilitates the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision. 8 International Association for Public Participation.

9. Stakeholder Engagement “It’s not about silencing the vocal minority, it’s about raising the participation of other stakeholders…sometimes the hard to reach groups are easily overlooked”. Amelia Shaw, President, IAP2 Canada, 2011 Stakeholders are diverse Know your audience Be sure to reach vulnerable sub- populations Use multiple approaches Independent facilitator Focus on the goal (desired outcome) 9

10. Tools and Approaches Traditional channels –Nothing can completely replace traditional channels and the value of face-to-face dialogue when building relationships, trust and tackling challenging issues. –e.g., newsletters, newspapers, public meetings, focus groups, advisory committees, workshops, phone in, advertisements, tours, surveys, feature article, journal publication 10

11. Engaging in the 21 st century 11

12. Engaging in the 21 st century Go to where your stakeholders are: Traditional approaches still have their place On-line and social media expand reach and scale Social media Creating community Dialogue and transparency New opportunities for relationships Facebook, wikipedia, twitter, LinkedIn, blogs On-line YouTube – entertaining On-line surveys and feedback 12

13. Conclusions Need to use a combination of approaches to reach diverse stakeholders Guidance exists for traditional “best practices” Be open-minded to new approaches Tailor each strategy to: the objectives of the outreach, the audience(s), and the unique circumstances of the program/project. Keys to success - Transparency, clear and frequent communication, and strategic engagement 13