S9S5

230R88100

Rule 7. Speak clearly and with	oEPA

compassion.

Technical language and jargon are useful as
professional shorthand. But they are barriers to
successful communication with the public.

Guidelines: Use simple, non-technical
language. Be sensitive to local norms, such as
speech and dress. Use vivid, concrete images
that communicate on a personal level. Use
examples and anecdotes that make technical
risk data come alive. Avoid distant, abstract,
unfeeling language about deaths, injuries, and
illnesses. Acknowledge and respond (both in
words and with actions) to emotions that
people express—anxiety, fear, anger, outrage,
helplessness. Acknowledge and respond to the
distinctions that the public views as important
in evaluating risks, e.g., voluntariness,
controllability, familiarity, dread, origin (natural
or man-made), benefits, fairness, and
catastrophic potential. Use risk comparisons to
help put risks in perspective; but avoid
comparisons that ignore distinctions that people
consider important. Always try to include a
discussion of actions that are under way or can
be taken. Tell people what you cannot do.

Promise only what you can do, and be sure to
do what you promise.

Points to Consider:

•	Regardless of how well you communicate risk
information, some people will not be satisfied.

•	Never let your efforts to inform people about
nsks prevent you from acknowledging—and
saying—that any illness, injury, or death is a

tragedy.

•	If people are sufficiently motivated, they are
• quite capable of understanding complex risk

information, even if they may not agree with

you.

United States	a,Dr,i

Environmental Protection Agency "958
Washington DC 20460

Seven Cardinal
Rules of Risk
Communication

-------
There are no eaoy prescriptions for successful
risk communication. However, those who have
studied and participated in recent debates about
risk generally agree on seven cardinal rules.
These rules apply equally well to the public and
private sectors.

Although many of the rules may seem
obvious, thev are continually and consistently
violated in practice. Thus, a useful way to read
these rules is to focus on why they trequently
are not followed.

» » »

Rule 1. Accept and involve the
public as a legitimate partner.

A basic tenet of risk communication in a
democracy is that people and communities have
a right to participate in decisions that affect
their lives, their property, and the things they
value.

Guidelines: Demonstrate your respect for the
public and underscore the sincerity of your
effort by involving the community early, before
important decisions are made. Involve all
parties that have an interest or a stake in the
issue under consideration. If you are a
government employee, remember that you
work for the public. If you do not work for the
government, the public still holds you
accountable.

Point to Consider:

• The goal of risk communication in a
democracy should be to produce an informed
public that is involved, interested, reasonable,
thoughtful, solution-oriented, and collaborative;
it should not be to diffuse public concerns or
replace action.

This pamphlet was drafted by Vincent T. Covello and
Frederick W. Allen, with the assistance and reviao of
numerous colleagues in and out of government.
Covello is Director of the Center for Risk
Communication at Columbia University and is
currently President of the Society for Risk Analysis
(SRA). The views expressed here do not necessarily
represent the views of Columbia University or the
SRA. Allen is Associate Director of the Office of
Policy Analysis at the Environmental Protection
Agency. EPA has published this pamphlet as a
non-binding reference document, recognizing that the
manner in which the guidance should be applied will
necessarily vary from case to case. The authors invite
your comments.

-------
Rule 2. Plan carefully and evaluate
your efforts.

Risk communication will be successful only if
carefully planned.

Guidelines: Begin with clear, explicit nsk
communication objectives—such as providing
information to the public, motivating
individuals to act, stimulating response to
emergencies, or contributing to the resolution
of conflict. Evaluate the information you have
about the risks and know its strengths and
weaknesses. Classify and segment the various
groups in your audience. Aim your
communications at specific subgroups in your
audience. Recruit spokespeople who are good
at presentation and interaction. Train your
staff—including technical staff—in
communication skills; reward outstanding
performance. Whenever possible, pretest your
messages. Carefully evaluate your efforts and
learn from your mistakes.

Points to Consider:

•	There is no such entity as "the public";
instead, there are many publics, each with its
own interests, needs, concerns, priorities,
preferences, and organizations.

•	Different risk communication goals,
audiences, and media require different risk
communication strategies.

Rule 3. Listen to the public's
specific concerns.

If you do not listen to people, vou cannot
expect them to listen to you. Communication is
a two-way activity.

Guidelines: Do not make assumptions about
what people know, think, or want done about
risks. Take the time to find out what people are
thinking: use techniques such as interviews,
focus groups, and surveys. Let all parties that
have an interest or a stake in the issue be
heard. Identify with your audience and try to
put yourself in their place. Recognize people's
emotions. Let people know that you
understand what they said, addressing their
concerns as well as yours. Recognize the
"hidden agendas," symbolic meanings, and
broader economic or political considerations
that often underlie and complicate the task of
risk communication.

Point to Consider:

• People in the community are often more
concerned about such issues as trust,
credibility, competence, control, voluntariness,
fairness, caring, and compassion than about
mortality statistics and the details of
quantitative risk assessment.

-------
Rule 4. Be honest, frank, and
open.

Rule 5. Coordinate and collaborate
with other credible sources.

In communicating nsk information, trust and
credibility are your most precious assets.

Guidelines: State your credentials; but do not
ask or expect to be trusted by the public. If you
do not know an answer or are uncertain, say
so. Get back to people with answers. Admit
mistakes. Disclose nsk information as soon as
possible (emphasizing any reservations about
reliability). Do not minimize or exaggerate the
level of risk. Speculate only with great caution.
If in doubt, lean toward sharing more
^formation, not less—or people may think you
are hiding something. Discuss data
uncertainties, strengths and
weaknesses—including the ones identified by
other credible sources. Identify worst-case
estimates as such, and cite ranges of nsk
estimates when appropriate.

Point to Consider:

• Trust and credibility are difficult to obtain.
Once lost they are almost impossible to regain
completely.

Allies can be effective in helping you
communicate nsk information.

Guidelines: Take time to coordinate all
inter-organizational and intra-organizational
communications. Devote effort and resources to
the slow, hard work of building bridges with
other organizations. Use credible and
authoritative intermediaries. Consult with
others to determine if you or others are best
able to answer questions about risk. Try to
issue communications jointly with other
trustworthy sources (for example, credible
university scientists, physicians, or trusted local
officials).

Point to Consider:

• Few things make risk communication more
difficult than conflicts or public disagreements
with other credible sources.

Rule 6. Meet the needs of the
media.

The media are a prime transmitter of
information on risks; they play a critical role in
setting agendas and in determining outcomes.

Guidelines: Be open with and accessible to
reporters. Respect their deadlines. Provide risk
information tailored to the needs of each type
of media (for example, graphics and other
visual aids for television). Prepare in advance
and provide background material on complex
risk issues. Do not hesitate to follow up on
stories with praise or criticism, as warranted.
Try to establish long-term relationships of trust
with specific editors and reporters.

. i i > *

Point to Consider: '

• The media are frequently more interested in
politics than in risk;, more interested in
simplicity than in complexity; more interested
in danger than in safety.

-------