RISK COMMUNICATION It maybe self evident that effective communication is crucial for the management of environmental issues, but as I explain in the theory pages of this website, effective environmental communication involves dealing with some subconscious aspects. People are generally convinced that environmental protection is necessary, but are usually not aware of the romantic notion of the environment that is partly responsible for that conviction. Most environmental communication does not address that phenomenon. This leads to polarized environmental discussions, during which parties present their arguments in ever changing disguises. Significant environmental resources are thus being tied up in maintaining a status quo, while each party holds on to its ‘being right’. The key to effective environmental communication lies in the acknowledgement of the emotional nature of environmental issues. It lies in acknowledging that we do not know how clean the environment should be or what the quality of our lives ought to be. It lies in acknowledging our fear as well as adoration of nature. And it lies in acknowledging the concerns for the environment as well as the case for development. Once we acknowledge this, we are bringing the subconscious aspects of environmental protection to the surface and we can manage them for what they are, rather than for what they are disguised at. Most environmental communication is, however, still based on the desire to approach environmental management in an objective manner. The question why nature acts the way it acts is central to this approach. The aim of this natural science approach is to improve our understanding of the sustainability of our environmental impacts. The key communication strategy of this approach is education. More and more organisations are realising that people don’t always respond to objective arguments and have embraced social science as a way of improving their environmental management strategy. Social science aims to explain why people act the way they act and its main communication strategy is involvement. Stakeholder consultation and public consultation are products of this approach. I suggest a method of risk communication that combines the strengths from natural science and social science and to add a third. This additional strategy is aimed at understanding why environmental issues are important, so that the most effective management strategy can be identified. This seems to add a layer of complexity, but actually, it removes one instead. Instead of responding to symptoms it responds to underlying concerns. The figure below shows these three supplemental communication strategies in combination. This method of risk communication aims to communicate environmental issues in the following simple manner: First, a description is provided of ones understanding of the environmental issue in question, so that the various parties can agree that it is the issue that needs to be managed. Including a summary of ones understanding of an environmental issue also means that the other party is being acknowledged and this in itself will reduce polarization. Very often this first step is overlooked and concerns are accepted at face value. Even when concerns are accepted reluctantly, they are not challenged and this adds legitimacy to them. Secondly, a description is provided of all the (company) activities which relate to the concern. This step helps to further clarify the scope of, and hence responsibility for, the environmental issue. If the concern is, for instance, about air quality, then all potential sources of (company) atmospheric emissions should be described. Thirdly, any gaps in understanding are highlighted. It is important to identify gaps in understanding because they present opportunities for engagement. There is a strong tendency to avoid naming gaps in understanding as that implies that the environmental issue is not in control. It is often more comfortable to brush them aside. Ignoring what we don’t know does, however, tend to backfire. Finally, a summary is presented of the measures which have been implemented to reduce the likelihood that an environmental impact will occur together with an explanation of how any gaps in understanding are managed. This basically describes how the environmental issue is being managed and opens it to criticism. The description avoids to draw conclusions, such as that the issue is insignificant, or acceptable. Instead, the description is aimed at providing the reader with enough information to make this judgement him or herself.

Copyright TINA Consultants Ltd 2005