Designing an Analytic Deliberative Process for Environmental Health Policy Making in the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex

Using a National Research Council Report as a centerpiece, Drs. Tuler and Webler evaluate the effectiveness of a conceptual approach to risk policy-making

Mountain Goat Removal in Olympic National Park: A Case Study of the Role of Organizational Culture in Individual Risk Decisions and Behavior

Using a case study, the authors explore the mediating role of organizational culture in individual Risk-taking decisions and behaviors. They argue that organizational culture can establish unique conditions that lead to highly reliable performance of high-Risk, undesired tasks. The authors also discuss the need for further research and its implications for Risk management

How To Do Environmental Decision Making: Varying Perspectives on the U.S. National Research Council’s Understanding Risk Report

There are two reasons why public participation in decision making about risk and environmental management persists as an important, timely issue. First, people still disagree about whether lay people should be involved in these decisions at all. This is the question of “why?” Second, there is uncertainty about how to best involve, meaningfully, diverse lay people and scientists in an efficient, effective decision making process. This is the question of “how?

Communication and participation: Why, how, when, and with whom in a SNF/HLW transportation system to address social and economic impacts

Presentation on transportation systems and their ability to cause disproportionate social and economics impact to vulnerable communities. The available pdf file consists of presentation slides. This research was completed money allocated during Round 5 of the Citizens’ Monitoring and Technical Assessment Fund (MTA Fund). Clark University was named conservator of these works. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at [email protected]://commons.clarku.edu/clark_mtafund/1002/thumbnail.jp

PromotingClimate Change Awareness and Adaptive Planning in Atlantic Fisheries Communities using Dialogue-based Participatory Vulnerability Analysis, Mapping, and Collaborative Systems Dynamic Modeling

The goals for the proposed project are twofold: • First, the project will improve understandings of how a changing climate will affect fishing communities’ abilities to maintain marine fisheries and the local economies historically dependent upon them. • Second, the project will investigate the role of a structured dialogue and participatory modeling process to support decision makers in fishing communities addressing consequences, vulnerabilities, and adaptive strategies in a context of climate stressors

Public Participation in Watershed Management Planning: Views on Process from People in the Field

Watershed planning is an important focus of environmental protection efforts in many states. Still, how to involve the public in watershed planning remains controversial. This paper reports on research that used Q methodology to study how experienced watershed management planners and activists perceive the proper way to involve the public in decision-making. Four perspectives about how best to involve the public in watershed planning emerged. One emphasizes that a good process is credible and legitimate and that it maintains popular acceptance for outcomes. A second sees a good process as one that produces technically competent outcomes. A third focuses on the fairness of the process. A fourth perspective pays attention to educating people and promoting constructive discourse. Differences among these views suggest an important challenge for those responsible for designing and carrying out public participation processes. Conflicts may emerge about process designs because people disagree about what is appropriate in specific contexts

Health and environmental risk communication in Thailand: an analysis of agency staff 's perspectives on risk communication with external stakeholders

"Health and environmental agencies are routinely called upon to provide risk-related information to the public-at-large and to more narrowly defined audiences, such as children, pregnant women, or labourers. While a large body of guidance is available, it is often general and transferability to new contexts is not well understood. In particular, the relevance of this guidance for South-East Asia is not clear. This paper reports the results of a study, using Q method, that aimed to develop a better understanding of officers' and staff's perspectives on health and environmental risk communication within a single regulatory agency in Thailand, the Pollution Control Department. The results demonstrate that there are multiple perspectives, and they are unrelated to roles or experience. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the ways that officers and staff within a national agency with important responsibilities for health and environmental risk communication in Thailand think about these responsibilities and how to achieve them." (author's abstract)"Gesundheits- und Umweltbehörden erfüllen üblicherweise die Rolle der allgemeinen Öffentlichkeit, aber auch speziellen Zielgruppen wie Kindern, Schwangeren oder ArbeiterInnen, risikobasierte Informationen zur Verfügung zu stellen. Trotz vorhandener Beratung ist diese oft sehr allgemein gehalten und eine Übertragbarkeit auf neue Kontexte ist schwierig. Besonders die Relevanz der Beratung in Bezug auf Südostasien ist oft unklar. Dieser Artikel berichtet über die Ergebnisse einer auf der Q-Methode basierenden Studie, die versucht, ein besseres Verständnis über die Perspektiven von Führungskräften und MitarbeiterInnen in Bezug auf Gesundheits- und Umweltrisikokommunikation innerhalb der thailändischen Behörde für Umweltschutz zu gewinnen. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass es, unabhängig von den Rollen und Erfahrungen der Befragten, sehr unterschiedliche Perspektiven über Verantwortlichkeiten gibt. Die Studie gibt einen Einblick in diese Perspektiven und die Möglichkeiten der Umsetzung in einer verantwortungsvollen nationalen Behörde im Bereich Gesundheits- und Umweltrisikokommunikation." (Autorenreferat

Health Risks of Ionizing Radiation: An Overview of Epidemiological Studies

A Report by the Community-Based Hazard Management Program, George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark University. The health risks of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation are disputed within the scientific community. Risks associated with exposure to high levels of radiation are widely accepted and well documented based primarily on the studies of the atomic bomb survivors in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Some feel that the best way to estimate risk for low- level exposures is to extrapolate from higher doses, although there is some clear evidence of low-dose risk. In this overview we have attempted to give an unbiased summary of the available research with an emphasis on the lower doses. The strengths and weaknesses of the studies are explained in order to help assess the variety of sometimes conflicting evidence. This research was completed money allocated during Round 6 of the Citizens’ Monitoring and Technical Assessment Fund (MTA Fund). Clark University was named conservator of these works. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at [email protected]://commons.clarku.edu/clark_mtafund/1004/thumbnail.jp

Managing Uncertainties in Radioactive Site Clean-ups

Our goals in this discussion derive from our belief that effective cleanups that meet broad public health and social welfare objectives are most likely to occur when there is real cooperation between the parties responsible for cleanup and the affected communities. Such cooperation at most radioactive sites of concern is extremely difficult to achieve. The technical nature and complexity of the issues is a serious barrier to communication: faced with lengthy and incomprehensible technical documents that set forth apparently arbitrary goals for cleanup, community people may well feel that the responsible parties are not addressing their principal concerns, and often enough this perception is correct (Goble 1993; Goble and Thompson 1994; Goble 1998). Furthermore, at many sites there has been a long history of mishandling of radioactive materials, of secrecy and concealment, and of exclusion of the public from decision-making processes. The legacy of fear and distrust extends in both directions: the public does not trust the technical community to protect it or even to give adequate warning of problems; the technical community expects irrational fear and unreasonable demands from the public. In such unpromising settings, the inevitable presence of large uncertainties can very well exacerbate failures in communication and understanding. However, this challenge to cooperation is also an opportunity for the different parties with their different perspectives to make the effort to develop shared understandings and to cooperate on appropriate plans for addressing uncertainty. Our intent is to offer pointers toward cooperation that will be useful both to members of the technical communities involved in cleanup planning and implementation and to concerned members of the public. This research was completed money allocated during Round 5 of the Citizens’ Monitoring and Technical Assessment Fund (MTA Fund). Clark University was named conservator of these works. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at [email protected]://commons.clarku.edu/clark_mtafund/1000/thumbnail.jp

Integrating scientific and local knowledge to inform risk-based management approaches for climate adaptation

AbstractRisk-based management approaches to climate adaptation depend on the assessment of potential threats, and their causes, vulnerabilities, and impacts. The refinement of these approaches relies heavily on detailed local knowledge of places and priorities, such as infrastructure, governance structures, and socio-economic conditions, as well as scientific understanding of climate projections and trends. Developing processes that integrate local and scientific knowledge will enhance the value of risk-based management approaches, facilitate group learning and planning processes, and support the capacity of communities to prepare for change. This study uses the Vulnerability, Consequences, and Adaptation Planning Scenarios (VCAPS) process, a form of analytic-deliberative dialogue, and the conceptual frameworks of hazard management and climate vulnerability, to integrate scientific and local knowledge. We worked with local government staff in an urbanized barrier island community (Sullivan’s Island, South Carolina) to consider climate risks, impacts, and adaptation challenges associated with sea level rise and wastewater and stormwater management. The findings discuss how the process increases understanding of town officials’ views of risks and climate change impacts to barrier islands, the management actions being considered to address of the multiple impacts of concern, and the local tradeoffs and challenges in adaptation planning. We also comment on group learning and specific adaptation tasks, strategies, and needs identified