Transcript It`s Risk Management, Stupid - Corps Risk Analysis Gateway

Institute for Water Resources
2009
Risk Communication
Charles Yoe, PhD
[email protected]
National Center for Food Protection & Defense
Risk Communicator
Training
Defense
,
Response & Recovery
We would like to acknowledge the
NCFPD for the bulk of the material
in this presentation
Risk Communication Team
An Introduction to Risk
Communication
1. Defining Risk Communication: What It Is
& What It Isn’t
2. Risk Perception: Facts & Feelings
3. We’re All Risk Communicators: It Is Your
Job!
Learner Outcomes
• Apply the risk communication goals to a flood
or storm event.
• Describe the function of risk communication
within the risk management model.
• Identify the factors that drive perceptions of
risk.
• Compare and contrast communicator roles
from various segments of the affected
community.
5
DEFINING RISK COMMUNICATION:
WHAT IT IS & WHAT IT ISN’T
Risk Communication Defined
An open, two-way exchange of
information and opinion about risk leading
to better understanding and better risk
management decisions.
Source: USDA, 1992
7
Risk Communication Goals
 Tailor communication so it takes into account
the emotional response to an event.
 Empowers stakeholders and public to make
informed decisions.
 Prevent negative behavior and/or
encourage constructive responses to crisis
or danger.
8
"PERSONS NOT HEEDING
EVACUATION ORDERS IN
SINGLE FAMILY, ONE OR TWO
STORY HOMES WILL FACE
CERTAIN DEATH. ."
National Weather Service
Hurricane Ike Warning for
Galveston
September, 2008
Communication Models
Basic Communication Model
• Uni-directional or we tell “them” approach
• Who says - what - when - to whom - through
what channel - with what effect
Risk Communication Model
• Multi-directional
• Actively involves the audience as an
information source
10
Risk Communication Elements
Multi-directional & actively involves the
audience as an information source
• Audience
assessment
• Audience
involvement
• Message
•
•
•
•
•
Logistics
Metamessaging
Listening
Self-assessment
Evaluation
11
Risk Communication Outcomes
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Decrease illness, injury & deaths
Reduce property and economic losses
Build support for response plan
Assist in executing response plan
Prevent misallocation & wasting of resources
Keep decision-makers well informed
Counter or correct rumors
Foster informed decision-making concerning
risk
12
Risk Communication is
Trans-Disciplinary
• Environmental
Sciences
• Social Psychology
• Philosophy
• Political Science
•
•
•
•
•
Communication
Engineering
Economics
Public Health
Natural Sciences
Risk & Crisis Communication
Preparedness & Recovery
–
–
–
–
–
Planned, tested, strategic
Pre-event activities
Multi-directional
Proactive
Certain
Crisis Response
–
–
–
–
–
Spontaneous
Post-event
Uni-directional
Reactive
Equivocal
14
Applying the concepts
Unpacking
the
Message
15
What Risk Communication is
Not
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Spin
Public relations
Damage control
Crisis management
How to write a press release
How to give a media interview
Always intended to make people “feel
better” or reduce their fear
Is This Risk Communication?
What Risk Communication IS
• Considers human perceptions of risk
• Multi-directional communication among
communicators, publics and stakeholders
• Activities before, during and after an event
• An integral part of an emergency response
plan
• Empowers people to make their own
informed decisions
RISK PERCEPTIONS FACTS
AND FEELINGS
Risk Analysis Paradigm
• Everything we do involves risk
• Zero risk is unachievable
• Options exist for managing every risk
Interpreting Risk
• Communicating about risk is
difficult because of the way
people interpret risk
• Involves competing
perspectives: objective vs
subjective
21
What Shapes Perceptions
of Risk?
•
•
•
•
Hazard – something that can go wrong
Probability – likelihood of it happening
Consequences – implications of hazard
Value – subjective evaluation of the
relative importance of what might be lost
22
What Shapes Perceptions
of Risk?
•
•
•
•
Hazard – something that can go wrong
Probability – likelihood of it happening
Consequences – implications of hazard
Value – subjective evaluation of the
relative importance of what might be lost
23
Scientist - Consumer Disconnect
SCIENTIST
EXPERT
CONSUMER
PUBLIC
knows
thinks
feels
believes
Fact-based:
hazard, probability
Value-based:
consequences, value
24
Peter Sandman
“The risks that upset people are
completely different than the
risks that kill people.”
25
Perceptions of Risk
Risk = Hazard + Outrage
SOURCE: Peter Sandman
26
Outrage Factors Affecting
Acceptability
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Catastrophic potential
Familiarity
Understanding
Controllability
Voluntary exposure
Effects on children
Manifestation of
effects
• Victim identity
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dread
Trust in institutions
Media attention
Accident history
Equity
Benefits
Reversibility
Origin
A variety of risk comm
approaches
High
Outrage
(fear, anger)
Outrage
Management
Crisis /
Emergency
Communication
Public
Relations
Precaution
Advocacy
Low
High
Hazard (danger)
28
Goal: Reduce outrage so people don’t
take unnecessary precautions
High
Outrage
(fear,anger)
Outrage
Management
Crisis /
Emergency
Communication
Public
Relations
Precaution
Advocacy
Low
High
Hazard (danger)
29
Goal: Increase concern for a real hazard to
motivate preventive action
High
Outrage
Management
Outrage
(fear,anger)
Crisis /
Emergency
Communication
Public
Relations
Precaution
Advocacy
Low
High
Hazard (danger)
30
Goal: Acknowledge hazard, validate
concern, give people ways to act
High
Outrage
Management
Outrage
(fear,anger)
Public
Relations
Crisis /
Emergency
Communication
Precaution
Advocacy
Low
High
Hazard (danger)
31
Applying the concepts
Hazard +Outrage
and Your
Organization
32
WE’RE ALL RISK
COMMUNICATORS. IT IS
YOUR JOB!
Prevailing Model
Risk communication is centralized in PIO or
spokesperson functions
– Industry CEO
– Organization or agency head
– Communications director
– Other “official spokespersons”
34
Water Resource System
Risk Communicators
Official spokespersons
– Elected officials, industry CEO,
agency director, District Engineer,
community organization leaders
Communication staff members
FEMA
– Public information officers,
technical writers, web managers
Subject matter experts
AMEF
– Scientists, engineers, social
psychologists, technical experts,
public safety officials
35
Water Resource System
Risk Communicators
Educators & outreach specialists
– Extension staff, community
educators, outreach workers, public
health educators, public safety
educators, community hotline staff
Public health & safety specialists
– Agency directors, Corps, police, fire
and emergency response workers,
physicians, nurses, sanitarians, all
first responders
36
Alternative model:We’re
ALL risk communicators
Including informal channels &
networks
CSREES
–
–
–
–
Neighbor to neighbor
Rumor mill
Online blogs
“Person on the street”
interviews
– Talk radio
– Corps employees
– Others???
37
For Effective
forRiskEffective
Communication
Message Development
• Risk & crisis communication is an
ongoing process
• Communicate all of the risk
– Existing risk
– Residual risk
– Transformed risk
– Transferred risk
38
Flood Risk Management
10-yr Floodplain Occupant
Time in
floodplain
10 years
25 years
30 years
75 years
100 years
Probability of 1 or
more floods
65.132%
92.821%
95.761%
99.963%
99.997%
Risk in Perspective
Flood Risk Over 30 Years
w/ No Mitigation
Flood Risk Over 30 Years
w/ 100-year Protection
4%
Flood
96%
No Flood
Flood Risk Over 30 Years
w/ 500-year Protection
26%
74%
Flood
No Flood
Flood Risk Over 30 Years
w/ Floodplain Evacuation
6%
94%
Flood
Flood
No Flood
No Flood
1
Risk in Perspective
Flood Risk Over 75 Years
w/ No Mitigation
Flood Risk Over 75 Years
w/ 100-year Protection
0%
Flood
No Flood
Flood
47%
53%
No Flood
100%
Flood Risk Over 75 Years
w/ 500-year Protection
Flood Risk Over 75 Years
w/ Floodplain Evacuation
0%
14%
Flood
86%
No Flood
Flood
100%
No Flood
Questions?
To learn more about Actions for Change
visit us on the web at
https://maps.crrel.usace.army.mil/AFC/