Effective communication between interested parties is widely held to be a vital element in health and environmental risk management decision making. There have been three phases in the evolution of risk communication during the last twenty years. Phase I emphasized risk: in a modern industrial economy, we must have the capacity to manage risks at a very exacting level of detail. Phase II stresses communication: statements about risk situations are best regarded as acts of persuasive communication, that is, as messages intended to persuade a listener of the correctness of a point of view. Now, in Phase III, public and private sector institutions increasingly are recognizing their responsibility to deal adequately with both dimensions and to carry out sound risk communication as a matter of good business practice.
[1]
M. Tamuz,et al.
The Organizational Links Between Risk Communication and Risk Management: The Case of Sybron Chemicals Inc.
,
1992
.
[2]
B Fischhoff,et al.
Risk perception and communication unplugged: twenty years of process.
,
1995,
Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.
[3]
Rück Bayerische,et al.
Risk is a construct.
,
1993
.
[4]
William Leiss,et al.
“Down and Dirty:” The Use and Abuse of Public Trust in Risk Communication
,
1995
.
[5]
Wil Lepkowski.
Chemical Companies Make Public Worst Case Accident Scenarios: West Virginia firms tell how serious accidental releases could be, what they are doing to prevent them
,
1994
.