Integrating Lay and Expert Perspectives on Risk for Site-Specific Decision-Making

University Of California-Irvine, Irvine CA

Investigators

Abstract

Decisions about a contaminated waste site can lead to significant social conflict and can have enduring psychological impacts within nearby communities. The risk situation and its potential to affect the quality of life can evoke hypervigilance, outrage, fear, apathy and a decreased sense of efficacy or control. Productive relationships between communities and regulatory agencies are essential for timely, fair and effective remediation decisions. However, risk management is particularly difficult when the public questions the reliability of risk estimates, remains skeptical about assurances of "no association" between health and exposures, and asserts that traditional analyses largely overlook concerns of affected populations. Early and meaningful public involvement in risk management is advocated as the best plan for minimizing conflict and improving decisions. But early stages of the process traditionally have been viewed as strictly in the realm of experts, or "science-based" activities. The integration of scientific principles and public values to profile a community risk situation rarely has been attempted in this country. The feasibility and effects of this strategy on the well-being of communities and the resolution of disputes about risk remain to be demonstrated. This project implements and evaluates an innovative strategy for participatory risk characterization proposed by the National Research Council. The model suggests that scientific analysis, as well as the perspectives and values of affected populations, should be incorporated into the process of profiling and characterizing risks. Within selected lower income and ethnically diverse communities, this longitudinal field experiment examines public responses to risk characterization and communications with officials from an involved federal agency. Several communities in close proximity to a site on the Environmental Protection Agency's National Priority List are matched on specific sociodemographic and other variables, and then randomly selected for participatory risk characterization or standard procedures. Long-term consequences of the new process are measured through telephone surveys and repeated in-person interviews with residents. The project offers an in depth study of change and stability over time in communities' risk judgments, coping strategies, framing of the decision problem, emotional responses, interpretation of and memory for risk information, perceived goals of risk management and trust in relevant parties. Archival records of communication between the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) and communities near prioritized sites also are used to document social conflict and public responses in the presence or absence of participatory risk characterization. Implementation of a well-controlled experiment is possible through extensive collaboration with the ATSDR. The ATSDR is the federal agency primarily responsible for communicating with public audiences about the human health risks presented by prioritized toxic waste sites. The study is expected to yield useful information about the feasibility and effects of increased community involvement early in the management process when risks are initially characterized.