DESIGN OF A PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROGRAM
FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
This report (SW-819) is reprinted with permission
of Fisheries and Environment Canada,
It was prepared by the Institute of
Environmental Research, Toronto., Canada
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1979
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
I.I The Study Approach 1
1.2 The Organization and Use of This Report 1
PART ONE: THE GENERAL PUBLIC CONSULTATION MODEL
AND PRINCIPLES FOR PROGRAM DESIGN 3
1.1 Introduction 3
1.2 The Public Consultation Model: Definition
of Terms 3
1.3 Previous Experience with Public Consultation
Concerning the Construction or Operation of
Hazardous Waste Management Facilities 6
1.4 Comments on Major Problems Encountered in
Previous Programs 10
1.5 Principles for' the Design of Public
Consultation Programs for Hazardous Waste
Management Facilities 15
PART TWO: A FRAMEWORK FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION
PROGRAMS . 18
1. Introduction 18
1.1 Overview: A Framework for Public
Consultation Programs 18
2.1 Stage One: Program Planning 21
2.2 Stage Two: Initial Announcement of
the Proposed Facility 26
2.3 Stage Three: Monitoring the Audiences'
Reaction 36
2.4 Stage Four: Responding to the Audiences'
Reaction 38
2.5 Stage Five: Exploring Solutions and
Resolving Issues 48
2.6 Stage Six: The Approvals Process 51
APPENDIX ONE: PUBLIC CONSULTATION TECHNIQUES 52
Introduction 52
3.1 Guidelines for Implementing Techniques 53
3.2 Information Dissemination Techniques 56
3.3 Problem-Solving Techniques 76
3.4 Working With the Media 81
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 87
-------
DESIGN OF A PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROGRAM
FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
INTRODUCTION
I.I THE STUDY APPROACH
The design of the public consultation program involved the develop-
ment of a general public consultation model and the analysis of case studies
dealing with the public's reaction to hazardous waste management operations,
The case study analysis identified:
major public concerns
- various interest groups or "audiences" that requested
information or became involved
the specific concerns of each audience
the information provided to audiences
the techniques used to disseminate information
the audiences' reaction to the information
the timing of information dissemination.
Analysis of the case studies demonstrated major difficulties and
failings of previous public consultation programs and resulted in detailed
principles being developed to govern the design of future programs.
Following the case study analysis a framework for the design of pub-
lic consultation programs for hazardous waste management facilities was de-
veloped which describe the stages of the program and appropriate informa-
tion dissemination techniques for each stage.
1.2 THE ORGANIZATION AND USE OF THIS REPORT
This report has been written for the practitioner. It offers prac-
tical guidance to the individual or agency about to undertake a public
consultation program in connection with the proposed construction and
operation of hazardous waste management facilities. Recommended activities
at each stage of the program are outlined. In addition, direction is pro-
vided on appropriate staffing and costs for the program.
-------
The report is organized into three major parts. Part One describes the
general public consultation model, defines terms, and outlines principles
that govern the design and operation of public consultation programs. Part
Two is an overview of the six major stages that constitute the public consul-
tation program. The six stages provide the overall framework into which par-
ticular information dissemination techniques must be incorporated. The tech-
niques are described in Appendix One. The strengths and weaknesses, probable
costs and appropriate staffing of the techniques are outlined.
To design or "assemble" the public consultation program, techniques are
selected from Appendix One and incorporated into each of the stages outlined
in Part Two of this report. The choice of techniques will depend on their
relative strengths and weaknesses; the feasibility of their use in particular
situations; and, of course, costs and staffing requirements.
While this report is intended to provide a series of guidelines for the
practitioner, it should be used with discretion. No two public consultation
programs are likely to be identical. The actual program implemented in a
specific community must be sensitive enough to identify unexpected develop-
ments and flexible enough to respond to them.
It. must be stressed that a public consultation program, no matter how
effective, can not be expected to overcome community opposition to a hazard-
ous waste management facility. Its only purpose is to provide the best
available information to people concerned about the impact of the facility.
While the program may succeed in overcoming misconceptions and contributing
to a more reasoned discussion of the facility's impacts, it will rarely be
the vehicle for winning the community's support for the facility.
Finally, the public consultation program described in this report is
a comprehensive program that begins with a planning stage prior to the ini-
tial announcement of the proposed facility and continues until the commence-
ment of the approvals process. The structure of the program assumes that the^
public learns of the proposed facility from information disseminated as part
of the program. If a consultation program was initiated after the public
learned of the proposed facility the program described here would not be
appropriace. However, some of the principles for designing consultation
programs described in this report would be applicable and instructive in
this situation.
-------
PART ONE
THE GENERAL PUBLIC CONSULTATION
MODEL AND PRINCIPLES FOR
PROGRAM DESIGN
-------
PART ONE
THE GENERAL PUBLIC CONSULTATION
MODEL AND PRINCIPLES FOR
PROGRAM DESIGN
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Part One of the report includes:
A detailed description of the public consultation model
and each of its components. These descriptions will
define terms used throughout this report.
A brief review of previous public consultation approaches
dealing with the construction or operation of hazardous
waste management facilities.
A summary of the major problems and failings of previous
public consultation approaches.
An outline of major principles for designing public
consultation programs.
1.2 THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION MODEL: DEFINITION OF TERMS
A simplified model of the key components of a public consultation
program is presented in Figure One.
The Agency is the initiator or source of the public consultation
program. The agency may be either a public or private group that wishes
to communicate with other people and chooses to do this with a public
consultation program.
The Information is the message or communication that the agency
wishes to make publicly available. The Information is characterized
both by its content and its organization (i.e. the complexity of the
message; the order in which different messages are presented; the degree
of repetition; etc.).
Techniques refer to the vehicles used to pass the information
between the agency and the audience. The vehicles might include such
things as face-to-face communication; news releases; large meetings;
radio broadcasts, etc.
-------
FIGURE ONE
A MODEL OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS
The Agency
Context
Public Consultation Program
Information Techniques
Feedback-
Audience
l
Time-
-------
The combination of information and techniques employed over a period
of cime constitute the public consultation program.
The Audience is the recipient of the agency's information. The
audience may be individuals or groups with whom the agency is interested
in communicating.
Timing calls attention to when the public consultation program should
begin and end as well as to the sequence in which information is provided
and different techniques introduced.
The Feedback from audience(s) to agency indicates the degree to which
the information was received, understood, and accepted. The feedback will
most often be exhibited in the attitudes, opinions and behaviour of the
audience that should be monitored by the agency throughout the public consul-
tation program. It is through feedback that the agency can judge the
impact and success of the program and decide what additional information
and techniques should be introduced in subsequent stages of the program.
The Concext refers to the social, political and cultural atmosphere
within which information is presented. It defines a set of beliefs and
values that have an impact on what is publicly credible and acceptable.
In terms of a public consultation program we can distinguish between the
following three components of the context. The Site Specific context
refers to other pieces of information available to the audiences about
the specific facility planned for their community (e.g., the location,
the wastes it would handle, the technology involved, etc.). The General
context refers to information available on all hazardous waste management
facilities (e.g., the reported cancer causing properties of certain
chemicals; the alternatives to disposal of wastes; previous experience
with waste operations, e.g., Love Canal). Finally, the Values context
refers to the societal values and beliefs that influence how people react
to information on particular topics (e.g., attitudes regarding the environ-
ment and pollution; the desirability of recycling wastes, etc.).
Clearly, the context will have an impact on the information the
agency wishes to communicate, and the nature of the audiences' reaction to the
information.
-------
While each component of Che model has been discussed separately,
they are clearly interconnected. The major objective is that the agency's
information be understood and accepted. This understanding and acceptance
is a function of the audiences' perception of the agency; the content and
organization of the information; the extent to which the techniques
successfully convey the information to the audience; the impact of context
on the acceptability of the information; and finally, the composition and
attitudes of the audience(s).
Before proceeding to a discussion of the implementation of the model,
it will be useful to review previous experience with public consultation
based, on the case studies.
1.3 PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE WITH PUBLIC CONSULTATION
CONCERNING THE CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION OF
PROPOSED AND EXISTING HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
1.3.1 The Agencies
Agencies' experience with public information has been largely shaped
by their defensive role. They generally have provided information after
public disclosures gave rise to a perceived threat from the operation,
or the proposed operation, of the hazardous waste management facility.
Agencies have been faced with hostile audiences that have questioned
their motives; attacked their credibility; and challenged the veracity
of their information.
1.3.2 Information Content and Organization
Public information has been generally provided in the following
areas:
general background to the problem, including statistics
on rates of generation of the waste and the need for
management facilities
the method by which hazardous wastes are (or will be)
stored and/or disposed of at the subject facility
-------
Sect. 1.3 Previous Experience (cone.''
all risks and the safety precautions associated with
the facility
the reasons why the proposed site was selected for a
disposal facility.
The information that has been presented to the public can be charac-
terized as:
complex, in that it often dealt with intricate and
involved engineering or chemical processes
technical, in that symbols and terminology common
to scientific language were often used
expert, in that trained and qualified personnel were
used to present the material.
Consequently, the information has not always been easily understood
by non-expert audiences.
The agency generally:
presented their side of the argument only (and relied
on their opposition to present the opposing point of
view)
presented arguments that favoured their point of view
first and dealt with opposing points of view in
rebuttal only
presented information almost exclusively in terms of
the costs and benefits of the facility from a societal
instead of a oersonal perspective.
Organizing information in this manner has usually established the
agency and the audience as opponents in an adversary process. Conse-
quently, it has created an unproductive atmosphere for the exchange and
consideration of information.
1.3.3 Techniques
The two most common techniques used to disseminate information con-
cerning hazardous waste management facilities are the informal public
meeting and the formal public hearing.
The former has generally consisted of:
a formal presentation from the agency to a mass audience
the use of some visual aids or graphics for demonstration
purposes
questions from the audience.
-------
Sect. 1.3 Previous Experience (cone.)
The public hearing is a much more formal procedure with a structured
format consisting of:
the presentation of expert evidence to an assessment
panel
the possibility for examination of the evidence
1.3.4 The Audience
The programs have presented information to the general public as a
single audience despite the fact that it has been composed of a number
of distinct groups including:
The Organized Public
a small group of community residents who had formed an
organization to comment, on the facility
existing community organizations who had adopted a
position regarding the facility
local self-interest groups whose particular interests
were perceived to be affected by the facility
The General Public
a number of individuals from the community who were not
affiliated with any organized group
Politicians
political leaders from outside and from the community
Public Interest Groups
national or regional public interest groups who took an
interest in the general issues surrounding the facility
(e.g., Pollution Probe)
Local Experts
experts who take a direct interest in the technological
or scientific issues involved in operating the facility.
1.3.5 The Major Concerns of the Audiences
The large number of concerns that have been raised by audiences can
be grouped into ..the following four classes:
Environmental/Health concerns are those that relate to
the hazards to the environment or to human health asso-
ciated with storing and processing hazardous
wastes at the facility.
-------
Sect. 1.3 Previous Experience (cone.')
Sice Planning concerns are chose chat relate to the
operation of any noxious or industrial facility in a
conramnicy (e.g., increased cruck traffic; noise and
odour pollution; the visual impact of the facility;
affect on property values, etc.).
Policy concerns are those chat relate to the philoso-
phy underlying the construction and operation of
hazardous waste management facilities (e.g., are re-
cycling or recover;.' viable alternatives) .
Quality of Life concerns are those that relate to the
individual's subjective perception of the impact the
facility will have on the experience of living in the
community.
1.3.6 Timing
Information has generally been provided in response to angry public
demands following revelations concerning the operation or introduction
of a facility or alternatively during the approvals process. The infor-'
mation has generally been provided:
simultaneously to all audiences
only after the public became aw.are of the apparently
secret issue from other sources
often after the public formulated an opinion on the
facility
after the agency's credibility was called into question.
1.3.7 The Context
The public consultation program has generally not been the only
source of information audiences turned to for answers to their ques-
tions. Other sources of information have included:
people opposed to the facility
the media or individuals with firsc or
second hand experience wich ocher hazardous waste
facilities
government or industry officials making statements
concerning policy on hazardous wastes
experts documenting research findings on the effects
of hazardous wastes, etc.
This information generally reaches the audience through the media.
-------
10
1.4 COMMENTS ON MAJOR PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED
IN PREVIOUS PROGRAMS
1.4.1 The credibility of Che agency and consequently of its in-
formation, has been undermined by their inability to
establish their trustworthiness to complement their
expertise.
The agency's credibility is a function of both its expertise and its
trustworthiness. Agencies have had less difficulty in establishing their
expertise than their trustworthiness. The timing of public disclosures,
often after problems developed, and the apparent secrecy surrounding
previous waste management facilities has often resulted in public mis-
trust of the agency. If the agency's view regarding the facility's
impacts is to be believed, it must be perceiveci as both technically
competent and trustworthy. In the past, emphasis has been placed on
expertise at the expense of trust. An open and responsive public con-
sultation program can assist the agency to establish its trustworthiness.
1.4.2 The credibility of the agency appears to have been
damaged in the past by the agency's representatives
responsible for dealing with the public.
The credibility of the agency is partially dependent on the behaviour and
attitudes of its representatives. The agency's credibility will suffer
if their representatives cannot effectively communicate with people; do
not respect their concerns, even if in the agency's view they are unfound-
ed; cannot effectively lead groups in discussion and compromise, etc. The
sensitive role that agency personnel play must be recognized when selecting
staff for the program.
1.4.3 The credibility of the agency has sometimes suffered
when it was perceived to be closely tied to private
contractors or the approvals process.
The agency's credibility will suffer if the public feels that the de-
cision on the proposed facility has been made or will be made without
their involvement. The public may feel that there is too close of a
relationship between the private contractor proposing a facility (if
any) and the public authorities responsible for regulating and approving
such facilities (assuming they are three separate offices).
-------
Sect. 1.4 Problems Encount-jr-r
11
It is important that the body responsible for approvals be seen as
separate from the public consultation process. It must be made clear who
-1' s ultimately responsible for final approvals and the opportuniti-
."ailable to make an input throughout the approvals process . The .-
tion between the public consultation program and approvals process
be delicately but persistently stressed throughout the program.
1.4.4 "Special" audiences have either been ignored or grouped
in with the general public in most consultation programs.
Generally groups involved in hazardous waste management issues wili
quire different content of information. The politician, organized - '.. .:
local experts and public interest groups should be recognized as dir^^i-
ent audiences to insure the information they receive is relevant to :h~>'r
interests. However, this is not to suggest the audiences should be -seg-
regated from one another in separate programs. In most cases, audiences .
will want to be aware of each others' concerns and that they are receiv-
ing common information.
1.4.5 All information has been linked in the programs
regardless of how negotiable, contentious or poli-
tical it may be.
In most programs information is presented to the audiences in one package,
Mo attempt is made to separate information in terms of the probable
audience response. In most programs some things are open to negotiation
and others are not (e.g., the disposal technology may be non-negotiable
but the life of the site or truck access to it may be negotiable); some
information is more contentious than others (e.g., the risk of the
facility to human health compared to the increased traffic it will
generate); and some questions can not be resolved in a site selection
process for a particular facility because they must be considered within
a larger, societal decision-making framework. Different types of infor-
mation evoke different responses from the audience. Some information
encourages discussion (e.g., the best road alignment to minimize traffic
disruption); other information creates confrontation (e.g., the health
hazard represented by the facility); and others encourage debate (e.g.,
the appropriateness of disposal or recovery as a means of dealing with
hazardous wastes).
-------
Sect. 1.4 Problems Encountered (cont.)
12
When these types of information are not separated in the program,
the audience is forced to respond in one manner only. The issues become
linked and focus on the most contentious point. Confrontation results
and the ability is lost to make progress in the program through negotia-
tion. Alternatively, the audience may perceive the fate of the facility
to be tied to policy debates that can not be resolved in a site selection
process. In either case, public attention is focused on issues that can
not be resolved.
To the extent that it is possible, program information should be
segregated so that issues which lead to discussion, debate and confron-
tation are dealt with separately.
1.4.6 It has been presumed that if enough factual information
is presented to the audience concerning the safety of
the proposed facility that the information will even-
tually be accepted.
This presumption is the basis for most public consultation programs. How-
ever, people do not formulate at.titudes on the basis of facts alone.
Other entirely subjective considerations influence the individual's
attitude toward the proposed facility, including: the individual's likes
and dislikes; susceptibility to peer pressure; and self-image. Some of
these factors can be addressed in a. public information program.
1.4.7 Public information programs in the past have generally
emphasized the agency's point of view and ignored in-
cidents that are apparently peripheral or irrelevant.
This approach to public information will damage the agency's credibility.
The public information program should attempt to present both sides of
an argument when there is disagreement over policy. When there is a
level of uncertainty concerning some of the impacts of the facility this
should be acknowledged. The history of hazardous waste operations should
not be ignored, even if it is 'embarrassing or not directly comparable
to the proposed current facility. The public must be openly reassured
that mishaps and/or poor planning in the past will not be repeated.
-------
Sect. 1.4 Problems Encouncr..
13
j.4.8 Public information concerning hazardous waste management
facilities has seldom addressed the local community from
the perspective of the community.
Information disseminated to the public has not always recognized .
_;.vidual' 5 inability to handle large amounts of complex data; ini :r
analyzing the costs and benefits of a facility has been presence-- -
societal perspective instead of the local perspective; and, stattir-tr
risk have assumed individuals calculate risk statistically instej.
subjectively. Consequently, from the audience's perspective, publ:..
sultation programs have often been confusing or irrelevant. In e.ith-;
case, they are unlikely to influence the audience's opinion of the
proposed facility.
1.4.9 The public consultation program has often been based on
inappropriate techniques.
Public meetings have been used almost exclusively despite their inappro-'
priateness for dealing with complex, contentious issues before a hostile
audience.
Recommended alternative techniques- stress high levels of personal
interaction between the agency and the audience and allow audience mem-
bers to actively participate in the program by asking questions and
expressing opinions.
When complex issues are being discussed, information should be
simple and where appropriate, visually displayed. If the audience is
asked to express opinions as an aid to the resolution of issues, the
number of participants should be restricted and a discussion leader
should be provided.
Ideally, every member of the community would be given the opportunity
to personally discuss the issue with agency personnel. Of course, this is
generally not possible, but techniques should be adopted that approach
this ideal. Such techniques will be most successful in having the
audience understand and accept agency information.
-------
Sect. 1.4 Problems Encountered (cont.)
14
1.4.10 Information has generally been provided to audiences
simultaneously.
In most programs, the announcement of the proposed facility is made sim-
ultaneously to the general public, community leaders and the media
(assuming the media doesn't discover and "leak" the story prior to the
announcement). This timing often places the community leaders in the
difficult and embarrassing position of having to quickly formulate their
position on the facility publicly and with incomplete information. Their
usual response is to publicly oppose it. This position, once taken, is
difficult to rescind even if subsequent information suggests it should be
reconsidered. For this reason, community leaders should be provided with
information prior to other audiences.
1.4.11 Public consultation programs are seldom timed to reflect
the varying degrees of interest and desired involvement
of. the audiences.
Many programs disseminate information on one occasion only with no
provision for the continued involvement of audiences who might want
more information. The program should be continuous to answer all
public concerns in sufficient detail as they develop.
1.4.12. The media has often been treated with suspicion and as
an adversary in public consultation programs.
The involvement of the media in the public consultation program is inevi-
table and a co-operative working relationship is desirable. The agency
should freely provide information to the media and if possible, become
a source of background information for the media. This will involve
providing information on the proposed facility as well as background on
hazardous waste management facilities in general.
-------
L5
1.5 PRINCIPLES FOR THE DESIGN OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION
PROGRAMS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
The following principles for che design of the public consulr..-
program have been developed from che case study analysis. It is ";:..
tended that they be employed in the design of all future public coa
cation programs. Principles are presented for each component of t'^
general public consultation model.
For the Agency
1. Agency credibility is crucial for public acceptance of cheir
information.
2. The agency must establish its expertise and demonstrate its
trustworthiness if it is to be perceived as credible. Conse-
quently, agency credibility will be undermined by conflicting
expert information or activities chat suggest che public is
not receiving accurate information in an open decision-making
system.
3. The behaviour, speaking style, and attitudes of agency repre-
sentatives will have a direct bearing on the audience's per-
ception of the agency's credibility.
4. When a public authority and private contractor jointly act as
the agency, the corporate separation between the two should be
maximized and the autonomy of the approvals process emphasized
to maintain its credibility.
For the Information
1. The information reaching each audience should be comprehensive.
2. The unique information needs of different audiences should be
recognized to avoid providing certain segments of the public
with irrelevant, redundant or meaningless information.
3. Certain cypes of information are best conveyed with special
techniques. Consequently, techniques must be carefully selected
to ensure each audience receives and understands che information.
4. Information can be categorized according to the expected audience
feedback. Information that evokes discussion,- confrontation, and
debate should be segregated from each other in the program.
-------
16
5. The degree to which information is technical and complex should
be related to the sophistication and major concerns of the
audience.
6. Properly presented expert information will contribute to agency
credibility.
7. When it is clear that the agency and audience hold differing
views on an issue, the publicconsultation program should pre-
sent both views and should deal with views held by the audience
first.
8. Information will be more effective if it is recognized that atti-
tudes are not formulated on the basis of factual information alone,
9. Information analyzing the costs and benefits of the facility shoulc
be presented from a personal as well as a societal perspective.
For the Techniques
1. Information is easier to understand when presented with visual
aids. This will contribute to the audience's perception of
agency expertise and credibility.
2. Agency-audience interaction should normally increase the clarity of
the communication and the extent of. audience understanding and acceptance.
3. The audience's active involvement in the program will increase
their acceptance and retention of information.
4. Techniques that emphasize audience interaction with a single
agency representative place considerable demands on the rep-
resentative to maintain agency credibility.
For the Audience
1, The public can not be treated as a single audience. Instead, it
must be seen as a number of distinct but overlapping audiences
with different information needs.
2. The public consultation program should provide each audience with
the specific type of information they need.
3. The choice of techniques will be dependent upon the type of in-
formation to be communicated (e.g., technical, complex, conten-
tious, etc.), and the nature of the audience (e.g., amount of
organization, leadership, free time, etc.). Techniques will
not be equally effective in reaching all audiences.
4.- The program should not restrict the .availability of information
to any audience (subject to the normal rules of confidentiality).
-------
17
The audience will subjectively re-interpret information presented
by the agency to conform with their attitude needs, evaluation of
risk and ability to handle complex issues. The agency must reu.
nize that this process of reintarpretation may lead to the di"
tion of factual information and respond to this in the infor-
mation content of the program.
Timing
1. The community and the media should learn of the proposal r.o c-i.-
struct a hazardous waste management facility from the agency
program. Consequently, the information program should be
initiated soon after the decision to seek approval for the
facility.
2. The interest and involvement of audiences will vary depending on
how quickly their major concerns can be answered. Consequently.
it is important to address all audiences early in the program
and maintain contact with those who sustain their involvement.
3, Community leaders should be provided with information immediately
prior to the general public so that they are prepared to respond
to concerns when they are raised by the general, public.
For the Context
1. The public consultation program should be the major source of
information on all aspects of the proposed facility.
2. The agency should develop lines of communication with media sources
of information and provide them with information. In this sense,
the media can become a part of the consultation program.
3. The agency must provide information both on the proposed facility
and on previous incidents related to hazardous waste management
operations in an effort to deal with what is probably a very
negative public perception of previous efforts to deal with
hazardous wastes.
-------
PART TVIQ
A FRAMEWORK FOR
PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROGRAMS
-------
FIGURE TWO
A FRAMEWORK TOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROGRAMS
ROGRAM
TAGES
TIME
FRAME
C STAGE 1 ^
PLANNING
- Research is
undertaken to
assist with the
des ign of the
public information
program
(Stages 2-5)
V J
The period prior" to
contact with the publit
(approx. 1 month)
C STAGE 2 ^
INITIAL
ANNOUNCEMENT
- Bas ic information
concerning the
proposed facility
and the subject
of hazardous
wastes is dissemi-
nated to all
audiences
L J
»\
r>
^s\
^XJ
-J\
^^V^
^
\S^
^^\
The p
fsTAGE 3 ^
MONITORING |
AUDIENCE
REACTION
- the audience
reaction to
Stage 2 infor-
mation is
monitored to
identify ques-
tions that need
to be answered
or information
in need of ex-
pansion and/or
clarification
V J
eriod of contact u\
r\
^>
\s
s/\
^vi
f^^
n^
.h the
^STAGE 't ^
RESPONDING TO
AUDIENCE REACTION
- questions mid concerns
identified in Stage 3
are addressed
V J
ITAGE 5 ~^
ISSUE RESOLUTION
(OPTIONAL)
- in certain circum-
stances, ,111 audience
will work with the
agency to resolve
issues
L ^
ubl ic
1
I
1
1
t
'"STAGE 6 A
APPROVALS
- the designa-
ted authority
decides
whether ur
not to
approve the
proposed
faci 1 i ly
V J
ho period a f lor
lie program
-------
PART TWO
A FRAMEWORK FOR PUBLIC
CONSULTATION PROGRAMS
L. INTRODUCTION
In this pare of Che report an overall framework for the public '.oa^.l-
cation program is described. Six program stages are identified. ~\±.:
-------
20
and questions (.Stage Four) . In some programs it may also be appropriate
for the agency and audiences to work together to resolve issues over
which there is disagreement (Stage Five). This is clearly an optional
stage that in certain circumstances may be included in a public consul-
tation program.
-------
21
2.1 STAGE ONE:- PROGRAM PLANNING
2.1.1 Description
Prior to the commencement of the public consultation program,
is collected to assist with program design. This is the planning
stage. It is necessary because no two communities are exactly alike
and data must be collected to indicate how the program can be adapcii
and adjusted co the specific community where it will be located.
The planning scage cannot and should not end with the introduc-
tion of a strictly defined public consultation program. The program tnubv.
be flexible throughout all of its stages to respond to unanticipated
situations. The purpose of planning is to anticipate the audiences'
response at each stage of the program and to identify options available
to accommodate the response. Planning precedes program implementa-
tion but updating must continue after implementation to monitor its
progress and make necessary adjustments.
Planning factors and their relevance to the design of the public
consultation program are outlined in the following section.
2.1.2 Planning Factors in Program Design
In terms of the components of the general public consultation mo-
del, planning is concerned with the audience, information content and
techniques .
The planning analysis should provide data on the composition
of the audience; the concerns that may be raised by each audience and
consequently, the appropriate information content of the program; and
the range of techniques that are available and the likelihood that they
will be effective in the program.
The presence of "organized publics" in the community. Are there exist-
ing associations (e.g., service clubs, unions, a naturalists federation,
etc.) in the community that may take an interest in the issues surround-
ing the proposed facility? Do the associations have a large membership
-------
22
and are they active in the community? Is it possible to determine the
association's likely reaction to the proposed facility?
"Organized publics" might constitute a significant proportion of
the program's audience. Associations with a large and active membership
"may have their own vehicles for disseminating information. If their
likely concerns and questions about the facility can be identified and
techniques are adopted to ensure that these concerns are addressed, .the
associations can often effectively disseminate information to their
membership. (Of course, there is the possibility that these associations
might re-interpret or screen agency information to purposely issue
slanted information to their membership. In this situation, they would
be treated as alternative sources of information. This point is dis-
cussed in Stage Four of the program.)
The existence of "unofficial" community leaders. Are there individuals
in. the community who command the respect of the population? Are there
individuals who the public look to for advice and who help to establish
public opinion (e.g., a prominent religious leader or an influential
businessman)? What are the interests of the community leaders (e.g.,
the economic stability of the community) and what is their base of
support (e.g., parishioners, a local labour force, etc.)?
These questions will help to identify a very important group of
individuals within the- general public. If community leaders are apparent
and they are likely to influence public opinion it is important that they
receive information from the public consultation program.
The probable position of politicians. Who are the political rep-
resentatives for the community? Is it possible to anticipate their
position on the proposed facility?
Of all the potential audiences to be addressed in the public consul-
tation program, the politicians are probably the easiest to "get
to know" before the program is initiated. Often their positions, or
those of political parties they may be affiliated with, are a matter of
public record. If a position on issues relevant to the proposed facility
-------
23
has been adopted by the politicians, it should be possible to anticipate
their reaction. The politicians can also be informed of the inplicat:>r.<=
of the proposed facility for any policies or programs they have be=..-.
..icting. For example, if the politicians are actively promoting an
industrial development strategy for their community, the impact of c'
facility on this goal either directly or indirectly through such thine-:?
as infra-structure improvements could be made clear.
The community's previous experience with contentious issues related :o ^ther
proposed facilities. Has the community ever been confronted with a
similar contentious issue? If so, what concerns were raised? Who became
involved in the issue? What was the outcome of the issue?
A review of the community's previous experience (if any) with simi-
lar issues can provide insights into what types of concerns may be raised;
which audiences are likely to become involved; and, the nature of the
audiences' involvement (e.g., their experience with organizing the
community or whether they will adopt conciliation or confrontation to
deal with the proposed facility).
The character or self-image of the community. How would an outsider de-
scribe the community (e.g., a large municipal suburb, a small town, a
rural community)? How do the residents perceive their community and
what do they perceive to be its strengths and weaknesses as a place to
live (e.g., a quiet retirement community; a good place to raise children;
a prosperous industrial centre)?
These questions can rarely be answered in detail or objectively.
Nonetheless, a consideration of these questions in the planning stage
should provide some insight into the response to be expected from the audience,
The economic base of the community. How do most of the residents of the
community earn their livelihood? Are they engaged in activities that
are similar or complementary to the introduction of the proposed
facility?
-------
24
A hazardous waste management facility is an industrial use which
will likely be perceived as noxious and hazardous. If such a facility
is out of character with the economic base of the community, this may
help to define the concerns that will be raised and the information that
will have to be made available to the audiences.
The size and distribution of population in the community. Is the popu-
lation that is likely to be affected by the proposed facility concentrated
in one isolated location (e.g-., a town removed from other urban centres);
dispersed over a wide area (e.g., a rural community); or concentrated and
continuous (e.g., part of a metropolitan area), etc.? What is the total
population?
Answers to these questions are necessary to determine which techniques
can be effective in reaching the audiences, as well as the potential size
and magnitude of the program.
The media sources in the community. What types of media are available in
the community (e.g., local newspapers, radio stations, cable television,
etc.)? Who in the community is reached by these media (e.g., does the
local newspaper have a wide circulation or do more people read a more
prestigious out-of-town newspaper)?
An understanding of what types of media are available in the com-
munity is necessary to determine the potential role they could play in
the consultation program.
2.1.3 Interpreting Data on Planning Factors
Much of the data collected to investigate planning factors must
be interpreted subjectively. If data on such factors as the community's
character or the existence pf community leaders is even available, it
will likely be derived from highly subjective and impressionistic
sources. This is acceptable because the purpose of this stage is not
to develop an exhaustive socio-economic portfolio on the community but
rather to get a "feeling" for the public consultation program's audiences.
-------
25
As we noted earlier, the planning stage does not preclude the require-
ment for monitoring and possibly adjusting the program during its
operation.
2.1.4 Collecting Data on Planning Factors
The data discussed above can usually be collected from secondary
sources (i.e. census data; municipal directories; content analysis of
local newspapers) or personal observation. This data can not normally
be collected from primary sources (i.e. interviews with community
officials or residents) because the planning stage precedes the initial
public announcement of the proposed facility. It is important that
community concerns and questions not be raised in the planning stage
before there is a public consultation program in place to answer them.
Consequently, some data that is pertinent to planning factors may not
be collected until the first stages of the public consultation program.
A great deal of the planning stage data could be collected during
the site selection process for a proposed hazardous waste management
facility. Indeed, some of the planning factors (such as community
economic base and community character) should be considered in select-
ing the site and could be incorporated into the overall site selection
proess.
-------
26
2.2 STAGE TWO: INITIAL ANNOUNCEMENT OP THE PROPOSED FACILITY
2.2.1 Description
This is the first phase of information dissemination from the public
consultation program. Ideally, for most audiences this should be the
first announcement that a hazardous waste management facility has been
proposed for their community.
This stage is only concerned with the information to be distribu-
ted as part of the initial announcement of the proposed facility.
Responding to the audience's reaction to the announcement occurs in
Stage Four.
Stage Two is usually relatively short (a few days) but extremely
important. The agency should expect (and be prepared for) a flurry
of activity associated with the initial announcement of the proposed
facility. Information may be exchanged between audiences; some audiences
may make initial comment on the facility; and, the media will probably
be actively involved.
Following the initial reaction, there will usually be a. change in
the audiences' response, and therefore in the orientation of the public
consultation program. This marks the end of Stage Two of the program and
the initiation of Stages Three and Four. In these latter stages, con-
cerns will be examined in more detail, information will be exchanged
between the agency and the audiences, and issues will be defined more
clearly.
For most audiences, Stage Two of the program will be their first
contact with the agency. This stage is extremely important to the
audiences' perception of the agency's credibility. The techniques and
the information content of the program must endeavour to establish both
the competence and trustworthiness of the agency.
Finally, for many audiences this stage of the program will be their
introduction to the entire area of hazardous waste management. They will
probably require some fairly basic background information as well as de-
tails on the proposed facility. The information needs of the various
audiences may differ. Therefore, it is. important that the information
most relevant to each audience reach them at this stage.
-------
27
2.2.2 Stage Two Goals
Following from our description of this stage, we can identify th-
following goals:
1. to provide each audience with the best available,
relevant information on the impacts of the pro-
posed facility
2. to provide information to the audiences in a manner
that establishes and protects the credibility of
the agency
3. to make the audiences aware of the public consulta-
tion program
4. to establish, in the audiences' perception, the role
of the agency as a source of objective information
available to answer any questions the audience may
have concerning hazardous wastes and the proposed
facility.
2.2.3 The Timing of Stage Two
The timing of the initial announcement of the proposed facility is
extremely important.
The timing of the announcement to each audience is the central con-
cern in Stage Two. Audiences that act as sources of information within
their community will be expected to comment on the proposed facility
immediately following its announcement. If politicians and other community
leaders are to do this in a manner that is consistent with the public con-
sultation program, they must be provided with information prior to the
other audiences.
However, the timing here is extremely delicate. These audiences
should be provided with information before other audiences but once this
has been done it must be viewed as public information. Political leaders
should not be expected to maintain its confidentiality nor should they
put themselves (and the agency) in the position of being accused of keep-
ing information secret from the community. Such an accusation would
seriously damage agency credibility. Consequently, the informing of the
politician should be followed closely by a media briefing. At this
stage, the media will probably be the immediate and/or only source of
information for the other audiences.
-------
28
A second concern is how the timing of Stage Two of the program re-
lates to the subsequent stages. Each stage of the program will not end
at a pre-defined point that marks the initiation of the following stage.
There will be considerable overlap. While audiences will react at
different rates, some will have questions immediately following the
announcement. The agency must be prepared at this time to employ
Stage Four techniques to respond to these questions and explore audience
concerns in detail.
2.2.4 Stage Two Techniques
The .announcement of the proposed facility will reach most audiences
through media sources. Traditionally, public consultation programs start
after the announcement and are intended only to deal with questions and
concerns that arise (i.e. most programs start in Stage Four of the pro-
gram described here). The initial announcement can influence media
reports on the proposed facility, and consequently Stage Two should be
seen as essential to the overall program.
Briefings and information kits are the central techniques in Stage
Two of the program.
The agency must endeavour to provide information to the politicians
and the media, and through them to the other audiences. The agency
should answer the most pressing concerns of each audience and indicate
that additional information will be available in Stage Four.
2.2.5 Stage. Two Information Content
An audience's capacity to absorb and comprehend new information is
limited. In addition, an audience may be anxious to immediately receive
answers to questions that they feel are particularly important. The
agency's credibility may suffer if these questions are not answered in
the initial dissemination of information.
Consequently, the agency must decide what information should be
included for each audience in Stage Two of the program and which issues
can wait until Stage Four for elaboration.
-------
Audience Priorities for Information in Stage Two
The audiences will probably be most concerned with the following
issues at this stage:
basic information defining the proposed facility
why their community has been selected as appropriate
for the proposed facility
the environmental/health impacts of the proposed
facility.
Most audiences will be unfamiliar with the proposed facility and its
purpose and operation should be clearly and simply defined. Highly
technical or complex information should be available but avoided at this
stage. Audiences will probably request information concerning:.
the type(s) of material to be. handled at the site (not
a detailed description of chemicals, but rather a general
term such as "liquid industrial wastes")
why these materials need to be treated specially and
the potential hazard improperly managed wastes represent
to the environment and human health
the origin of the wastes (e.g., by-products of the
printing or metal working industry, etc.)
the quantity of wastes that are likely to be treated at the
facility, the life of the facility, and the likelihood it
will be expanded
what will be done with the wastes (i.e. how they arrive
at the site and how they are treated).
The criteria used to select the site will also probably have to be
addressed.
why it is necessary to develop a new facility in this
general region of the country
why the particular.location is appropriate and the
general criteria that were considered in its selec-
tion (i.e. environmental concerns; transportation
links; geological criteria, etc.).
Finally, the environmental/health concerns that likely would have
to be addressed in this stage of the program include the following:
the danger the wastes represent to human health if
improperly managed
the danger the wastes represent to the environment
if improperly managed
the danger to human health and the environment rep-
resented by the storing, handling or disposing of
the wastes at the facility.
-------
30
Describing the Public Consultation Program
The information content at this stage should also describe certain
aspects of the agency's public consultation program, including:
. the overall format of the consultation program
and the various opportunities for audience involvement
the relationship of the consultation program to
the formal approvals process.
The agency should describe the audiences' opportunities to
receive additional information and to comment on the proposed facility
at subsequent stages of the program. This will reassure audiences
anxious to participate as well as indicating when and how they can make
their input. In addition, provided the program is comprehensive, it may
contribute to the audience's recognition of the agency as a trustworthy
source of information. This combined with a program that is recognized
as open and unbiased will increase the audience's acceptance of the
information.
It is important to demonstrate the relationship between the infor-
mation program and the approvals process for a number of reasons. The
approvals process, whether it is a public hearing or a decision by
elected officials, is preceded by the consultation program. The audiences
should recognize this and understand that the program provides an oppor-
tunity to become informed, express opinions, and in some cases, perhaps
alter the proposed facility before a final decision is made. However,
the audiences should also recognize that the program and the approvals
process are separate. The audience's involvement in the program does
not preclude or pre-determine their involvement in the approvals process.
Moreover.it must be established that the consultation program is not a
vehicle of persuasion, for any particular party who may argue a point of
view in the approvals process. Rather, the program is intended to pro-'
vide unbaised information to allow the audiences to assess the impact of
the proposed facility and formulate an opinion prior to the approvals
process.
-------
31
2.2.6 Specific Stage Two Objectives for Each Audience and the Media
If the public consultation program is to be successful it shoi:'
achieve a number of objectives by the end of Stage Two. In this sc
objectives are outlined for each audience and the media.
Politicians
The objectives include:
to inform the politicians of the proposed facility's
impacts
to provide the politicians with information before
they have to discuss the facility with other audiences
to solicit their support for the public consultation
program.
The scope of the public consultation program should be outlined co
the politicians to indicate the opportunity each audience will have to
participate. The politicians may suggest refinements to the program.
The agency should be prepared to incorporate those refinements suggested
by the politicians that conform to the principles outlined earlier for
designing public consultation programs . When the suggested refinements
are inappropriate, the agency must be prepared to explain why they can
not be incorporated into the program.
The Local Media
The local media are not an audience of the public consultation pro-
gram, but they will be both receiving information from the agency and
disseminating it to other audiences. Consequently, the relationship that
the agency develops with the media at this stage is extremely important.
The objectives include:
to inform the media of the proposed facility's impacts
to establish a co-operative relationship
to establish the agency as an available, objective
source of site specific and general contextual
information.
-------
32
Succincc and well organized infonnation on the wide range of poten-
tial impacts of the proposed facility must be presented to the media.
Their emphasis at this stage will probably be on environmental/health
concerns, but they may have questions in the other areas as well.
The agency should endeavour to establish a co-operative relationship
with the media. The agency should be perceived as an open and available
source of information prepared to answer questions dealing specifically
with the proposed site or generally related to hazardous waste management.
The local press will research the history of hazardous waste manage-
ment facilities and operations. They will find examples of previous
unsuccessful operations. If the local media cites these examples without
attempting to establish their relevance to the proposed facility, they
may spread misconceptions that undermine the effectiveness of the
agency's program. This can be minimized if the agency is perceived as a'
trustworthy and competent source of information available to the media
for background information. Ideally, the media will approach the agency
for their perspective when preparing stories. The agency should make
comprehensive and easily understood background data on other hazardous
waste management facilities, and operations available to the media as
part of the public consultation program. They should also be prepared
to acknowledge that problems have developed in the past and demonstrate
how they will be avoided in the proposed facility.
General Public
The objectives for this audience include:
to inform the audience of the proposed facility's impacts
to identify segments of the audience who might request
further information from the program.
The general public must be provided with initial, basic information
on the impacts of the proposed facility. It is expected that at this
stage the majority of their concerns will focus on environmental/health
impacts.
-------
33
A second objective is Co identify that proportion of the audience
with additional concerns and questions that were not answered with th*
basic information available through the media. This proportion o\" :
audience must be incorporated into Stage Four of the program.
Organized Public
The objectives include:
to inform the audience of the proposed facility's impacts
to provide information to address specific concerns of
individual groups in the audience
.. to establish the groundwork for the audience's further
involvement in the program.
In addition to the basic information available to the general public,
the organized public may require detailed information concerning the im-
pact of the facility on their particular interests. For example, a local
real estate board may have a particular concern for the impact on property
values, or an agricultural association for the supply of farmland.
The opportunities available for participation in Stage Four of the
program should also be emphasized. An invitation for Stage Four involve-
ment will reassure the audience that additional opportunities are avail-
able to have their concerns addressed.
Local Experts
Many public consultation programs will not have an audience of local
experts. The local experts are individuals in the community who possess
expertise and are qualified to comment on the technical aspects of the
proposed facility. They may wish to participate in the public consulta-
tion program because of professional interest and/or to evaluate and
publicly comment on the facility from their perspective.
The objectives for this audience include:
to inform the audience of the proposed facility's impact
. . to inform the audience of technical matters related to
the operation of the facility.
-------
34
This audience's interest in the facility may differ from that of the
other audiences and they may be relied upon by other audiences for an
assessment of the facility based on their expertise. For these reasons
much more detailed information should be made available to local experts
and opportunities should exist for an in-depth exchange of expert
information.
This audience may become a source of informed local support or oppo-
sition for the facility. In either case it is important that they have
access to reliable technical information.
Public Interest Groups
The objectives include:
to provide project specific da-ta to the audience
., to establish the groundwork for the audience's
further involvement in the program.
The public interest groups will probably not be very active in
Stage Two of the program.
This audience may already be familiar with the impacts of other simi-
lar hazardous waste management facilities. Therefore, they will probably
only require a brief description of the facility (e.g., specific informa-
tion on the types of wastes to be handled by what method) and the rationale
for locating it in the proposed community. More detailed information
can be provided to this audience in Stage Four of the program. The purpose
here is not to initiate or duplicate the approvals process. Instead, it is
to provide basic background data on the specific project and invite the
audience to become formally involved in Stage Four of the program.
2.2.7 Stage Two: Summary
The major objectives of the public consultation program in Stage
Two, as they apply to each of the program's audiences, are summarized
in Figure Three. The recommended techniques for disseminating infor-
mation to each audience are also identified.
-------
FIGURE THREE
STAGE TVIO: THE INITIAL ANNOUNCEMENT
OBJECTIVES
(for the program at Stage 2)
to inform the audience of the proposed facility's impacts
to provide the audience with information before they have
to discuss the facility with other audiences
to solicit their support for the public consultation program.
to inform the audience of the proposed facility's impacts
to establish a co-operative relationship
to establish the agency as an available, objective source
of site specific and general contextual information
to inform the audience of the proposed facility's impacts
to identify segments of the audience who might request
further information from the program
to inform the audience of the proposed facility's impacts
to provide information to address specific concerns of
individual groups in the audience
to establish the groundwork for the audience's further
involvement in the program
to inform the audience of the proposed facility's impact
to inform the audience of technical matters related to
the operation of the facility
to provide project specific data to the audience
to establish the groundwork for the audience's further
involvement in the program
AUDIENCES
[to whom objectives apply)
POLITICIANS
LOCAL MEDIA
GENERAL PUBLIC
ORGANIZED PUBLIC
LOCAL EXPERTS
PUBLIC
INTEREST GROUPS
TECHNIQUES
[ for disseminating informatioi)
Briefing*
Information Kits *
Media Sources
Information Ki ts
Information Kiosk
Media Sources
Information Ki ts
Media Sources
Information Kits
Briefing
Information Kits
lnfiirm.it. ion Kits
* The information content of the «briefings and information kits would probably lie varied to mod thp nerds nl oai:h audii-nciv
-------
36
2.3 STAGE THREE: MONITORING THE AUDIENCES' REACTION
2.3.1 Discussion
Monitoring the audiences' reaction is essential for the effective
planning and development of future stages of the program. The monitor-
ing of public reaction during Stage Two of the program will allow the
agency to identify concerns that remain unanswered which must be
addressed with new or additional information in Stage Four. It is
through this monitoring process that decisions are made concerning
appropriate information content and techniques in Stage Four.
2.3.2 Stage Three Goals
1. to monitor the reaction of each audience to the
information provided by the agency (or other
sources) concerning the proposed facility
2. to identify issues and concerns on which the
audiences require new or additional information
so that it can be incorporated into subsequent
stages of the program.
2.3.3 The Timing of Stage Three
The monitoring of the audiences' response begins as soon as infor-
mation is disseminated in Stage Two and continues throughout the life
of the program. Monitoring must be continuous if the program is to be
flexible and effectively respond to public concerns.
Audiences will progress through the program at different rates.
Some will react immediately to Stage Two information while others will
take more time to formulate their response. Consequently, Stages Two,
Three and Four of the program will overlap. Stage Four of the program
should be initiated as soon as possible after the audience response is
monitored.
-------
37
2.3.4 Approaches to Monitoring Audience Reaction
The audiences' reaction can be monitored with the following
approaches:
specific monitoring devices can be incorporated into
each information dissemination technique
media sources capable of indicating audience reaction
can be monitored.
Examples of monitoring devices that can be incorporated into infor-
mation dissemination techniques, include: reply cards or short question-
naires for requesting additional information from the agency; a record
of the questions that are asked by audience members; a record of audience.
comments on written material for public distribution to determine if it
is intelligible and if it gives rise to other concerns and questions.
Appropriate monitoring devices are described for each technique later
in this report. These devices provide one indication of how the program's
information is being accepted and understood by the audiences.
Monitoring public reaction in the media will also identify issues
in need of clarification or further explanation. An analysis of the content of
newspaper reports, letters to the editor, or radio talk-shows will pro-
vide an indication of major audience concerns and misconceptions.
While many of these monitoring devices can provide quantifiable
data for program planning purposes (e.g., the number of calls or letters
dealing with a specific environmental/health issue, or environmental/
health issues in general compared to site planning issues) it must be
carefully interpreted. Program monitors must be aware of the range
of audiences expressing concerns to understand the extent to which mis-
conceptions exist in the community. They must also be sensitive to
concerns expressed by audiences even if they are illogical or at odds
with commonly accepted information. Furthermore, monitoring must be
understood as a major responsibility of all program personnel if emerging
concerns and misconceptions are to be responded to promptly.
-------
38
2.4 STAGE FOUR: RESPONDING TO THE AUDIENCES' REACTION
2.4.1 Description
Stage Four, the second phase.of information dissemination, is
directed at specific concerns or questions not addressed in Stage Two.
Audiences requesting continued involvement in the program to deal in
detail with specific issues are accommodated during this stage.
Stage Four of the program is usually the longest. It continues
from the announcement of the proposed facility to the approvals stage.
The major purpose is to respond to the audiences. Unlike Stage Two when
information was simply being disseminated, a dialogue between the agency
and audiences will be established. A greater range of techniques will be
employed to allow for the dialogue. The information that is exchanged
will be more comprehensive, often more complex, and increasingly
oriented to the needs of individual audiences.
In Stage Four, it will be the nature of the audiences' reaction
that determines the strategies for undertaking the public consultation
program. The reactions may include: demands for additional information;
emergence of conflicting and possibly misleading information; challenges
to the accuracy of agency information; and, refusals to acknowledge the
legitimacy of the agency as a source of information. The public consul-
tation program must respond to each of these reactions with an appropriate
strategy. The strategies for accommodating the range of potential audience
reaction are dealt with in this section.
2.4.2 Stage Four Goals
The Stage Four goals include:
1. to provide each audience with the best available
information to address the concerns they raise
2. to continue to provide information in a manner
that protects the credibility of the agency
3. to respond, through the public consultation pro-
gram, to the various reactions of the audience
experienced during Stage Two.
-------
39
2.4.3 The Timing or Stage Four
The audiences will usually establish the introduction and duration
of Stage Four because the program aust respond to their needs and acti-
vities. Audiences generally approach the agency in this stage for fur-
ther information from the program. The agency's monitoring of reaction
will also provide an indication of what the general public is thinking
and what types of information they are receiving. This may lead to the
periodic introduction of additional information from the agency to
clarify issues in response to apparent concerns or misconceptions.
The time frame for the entire stage will depend on the level of in-
terest amongst the individual audiences. In most cases activities will
be concentrated in the early part of Stage Four. However, it should
continue up until the approvals stage and provide all interested audiences
with sufficient opportunity to fully explore their concerns.
2.4.4 _Infonnation Content: Stage Four
The audiences' questions will determine information content in
Stage Four. As in Stage Two, the emphasis will probably be on environ-
mental/health issues. However, the program must also be prepared to
respond to site planning, policy and quality of life concerns.
The concerns documented below will probably constitute the infor-
mation content of Stage Four of the program.
The detailed environmental/health concerns may include the
following:
the precise impact of the facility and the waste on human
health (e.g., what quantity of waste would escape from the
facility into the community and what quantity is safe)
the possibility of leaks or ruptures in storage tanks,
pipelines, etc. in the facility
the possibility of spills from trucks or trains trans-
porting wastes to the facility
the possibility that wastes stored in natural forma- .
tions would escape.
-------
40
the possibility of earthquakes resulting, from the storage of
wastes under pressure in geological formations
the possibility of human or mechanical error leading to a
spill, especially where facilities are not manned on a 2^
hour basis
the adequacy of procedures used to ensure that treated
wastes are no longer toxic when discharged
the possibility that treated wastes or emissions will still
constitute contaminants (toxic or non-toxic) in' the
environment
the possibility of ground water pollution
the long-term security of the facility (e.g., the life of
plastic liners; the monitoring and maintenance of the
facility when it is closed down).
In addition to the above environmental/health concerns, the following
site planning concerns may be raised by the audiences:
why the community was chosen as the facility's location, particu-:
iarly if the community must accept waste from outside of its boundarie
the nuisance of increased truck traffic in the community .
increased pollution - visual and odorous - due to emissions
from the facility
the impact of the facility's operation on the natural environ-
ment (e.g., water tables, pollution, wildlife) and the
possibility of a detrimental impact on the community's
economic base (e.g., farming, fishing, the tourist industry,
etc.)
the. visual effect of the facility; i.e. an unsightly plant
would detract from the appearance of the area ,
the effect of the facility on property values.
The following policy issues may be raised by the audiences:
the possibility that options to the storage and treatment of
hazardous wastes have not been adequately explored; in par-
"ticular, the potential for recovery
the restrictions the community feels have been placed on
their ability to influence the decision-making process that
will grant approvals to construct hazardous waste management
facilities
which party will be legally liable in case of damage to che
environment or human health; and the limits of that liability
the role the government will take in guaranteeing that their
safety and livelihood will not be adversely affected by the
' facility.
-------
41
Finally, che following quality of life concerns may have co be
addressed:
the negative image the facility might portray of the
community
the detrimental impact the facility might have on the
character of the community and the experience of living
in the community,
2.4.5 Approaches for Responding to Audience Reaction
In this section guidelines are developed for responding to the
following audience reactions:
requests for additional information
the emergence of misconceptions
discussion surrounding uncertain information
or subjects based on opinion (Providing additional
information will not always satisfy the audience's
questions and concerns. In some cases, sufficient
information will not be available to answer questions
with absolute certainty. In other cases, no definitive
answer will be possible because the question is based
on opinion instead of fact. Either of these situations
could generate discussion or debate that must be
accommodated within the program.)
refusal by some audiences to seek information from the
agency and the establishment of "alternative" informa-
tion sources.
Requests for Additional Information
Information will have to be provided to respond to audience requests
for clarification of Stage Two information or additional information.
Techniques must be available for all audiences to reach the agency
with their questions, and information must be readily available to answer
the questions.
The organized public can be easily identified by the agency in Stage
Two and invited to remain involved in the program during Stage Four.
In most cases, these groups will not hesitate to seek out informa-
tion and will have little difficulty articulating their questions. Many
of them possess means of communicating with their membership and a formal
-------
42
organizational structure that allows them to delegate responsibility for
getting answers to certain individuals. Consequently, the concerns of
the organization can be reviewed with its representatives at an agency
briefing and these representatives can be relied upon to report back to
their membership. In this situation, the briefing is an effective and
easily arranged technique for information dissemination.
Similarly, the local experts, public interest groups, politicians
and media are easily identified and can be expected to approach the
agency for information. The likelihood that these audiences will be
smaller suggests that briefings, either regularly scheduled or as re-
quested, would be an appropriate technique. Key members of each of these
audiences might also be met with individually to deal with concerns in
greater detail.
The general public is the most difficult audience to identify.
Consequently, providing adequate opportunities for them to have their
questions answered may be difficult. Those with questions can not be
easily identified by the agency and they may be hesitant to seek infor-
mation. Unfortunately,if their questions go unanswered they may be
magnified into fears built on misconceptions and inaccurate information.
These fears, unless addressed by the program, may form the basis of a
concerted but misinformed opposition to the proposed facility.
It is important that opportunities be readily available for the
general public to receive answers to questions if they are to formulate
an informed opinion of the proposed facility. To maximize these
opportunities, techniques are required that:
address the concerns of individual members of the audience
are conveniently accessible
offer effective explanations to complex questions
accommodate emotional, and perhaps hostile, inquiries
offer anonymity to those desiring it.
-------
43
In combination, the hotline and information centre techniques
Accommodate these requirements.
Insofar as it is possible, responses to the audience's question,
nust be immediate. Questions that can not be immediately answered
undermine the credibility of the agency. If new information has to
bti generated to answer a question the audiences will not be confid^nn
that every consideration was thoroughly explored before their comsiuni-. .
was recommended for the proposed facility. This will damage the ager.cv' ^
credibility. Of course, it will not be possible to have answers or?.-
pared for ever1/ conceivable question. However, it may be possible tc
anticipate the major questions. The review of information content in
Part One of the report and the planning phase of the program should
help the agency anticipate audience questions.
The agency must respond with speed and clarity to effectively
answer audience questions. The agency representative must succeed:
in understanding the nature of .the concern (even if it is
poorly stated)
in sensitively appreciating the basis for the concern
even if it is unstated, (e.g., a layman's fear of un-
familiar chemicals and complex technologies)
in answering the question in a clear and comprehensive
manner.
The first two requirements reinforce the importance of properly
selecting staff for the program. Well-trained staff and advance prepar-
ation of information kits and visual displays will be required to clearly
and comprehensively address audience concerns.
The Emergence of Misconceptions
Misconceptions and faulty interpretation of program information are
likely when dealing with issues of this complexity. It is important to
identify and attempt to correct emerging misconceptions before they be-
come generally accepted. The monitoring process discussed in Stage
Three will aid in the identification of misconceptions.
-------
44
Misconcepcions are likely to arise amongst any of the audiences.
They should be addressed in Che same manner and with the same techniques
as the audience requests for additional information, discussed above.
Discussion and Debate Centered on Uncertainty and Opinion
A number of the issues surrounding the management of hazardous
wastes are characterized by some uncertainty (e.g., the exact effects
of certain chemicals on human health). Some degree of uncertainty
appears to be unavoidable given limitations to .our knowledge and ability
to precisely measure the occurrance of events.
Other issues that audiences may raise in Stage Four of the program
involve matters of opinion (e.g., the.responsibility that private
industry should bear for handling their own wastes or the steps that
should be taken to restrict the generation of certain types of waste).
Any of the audiences could raise these issues. Unlike the other
Stage Four responses, here it is not possible for the agency to simply
provide additional, factual information.
Uncertainty must be acknowledged. The only justifiable rationale
for uncertainty in the decision-making process that leads, to the recom-
mendation for the proposed facility is its inevitability. While this
may be justifiable to the proponents of the facility, it may not be
acceptable to the audiences. Consequently, attempts must be made to
demonstrate that any uncertainty that remains represents no danger to
i
the community.
Debate or discussion centered on matters of opinion must be separ-
ated from the public consultation program's emphasis on the proposed
facility. The debate should not be constrained but it should be made
clear that many of these issues must be resolved politically and that
this can not be accomplished as part of the decision concerning the
proposed facility.
Uncertainty and opinion are best handled with information kits
specially designed for this purpose. The kits should provide objective
information that presents both sides of an issue. The kits prepared
for this purpose would be different from other program kits.
-------
45
Refusals to Participate and "Alternative" Information
A fourth possible reaction from audiences is refusal to seek infor-
mation from an agency because they question its credibility. Such an
audience might also establish itself as an "alternative" source of
information.
This is a possibility at anytime in the program and is a conceivable
reaction from any audience. While it marks the end of this audience's
formal involvement in the public consultation program, the agency should
adopt the following guidelines to deal with these "non-participating"
audiences:
they should continue to make information available to
non-participating audiences
they should monitor any information being publicly dis-
tributed by the audience and respond to it through their
regular program.
The agency should not ignore an audience that has dissociated it-
self from the agency'sconsultation program. It is important to continu-
ally demonstrate that information is available to all audiences in an
open and objective program.
To close the program to the non-participating audience may provide
legitimacy to their challenge of agency credibility and to any "alternative"
information they may be disseminating.
It will also be important to monitor the information being dissemi-
nated by "non-participating" audiences. This should be a part of the
regular monitoring of contextual sources of information. Misconceptions
that may emerge from the information distributed by non-participating
audiences should be dealt with in the same manner as misconceptions from
other sources.
The information distributed by non-participating audiences may differ
from that of the agency in emphasis rather than content. They are likely
to emphasize areas of uncertainty and past problems in the area of hazard-
ous waste operations. If the agency has not already acknowledged these
factors in their program, this emphasis could seriously damage their
credibility. It will have a more limited impact if the factors have been
-------
46
.openly acknowledged and addressed previously in the program.
The agency's program should counter inaccurate or misleading infor-
mation disseminated from other sources. This should be done through the
regular channels of the program (e.g., at information centres or with a
page in an information kit). The manner in which the agency responds to
alternative sources of information is particularly important. The agency
must avoid damaging their credibility or drawing attention and adding
legitimacy to alternative sources of information. The agency should not
isolate inaccurate information originating from non-participating audiences
for special treatment in the program and should not^ acknowledge the sources
of inaccurate information.
The agency may focus attention on the activities of the non-
participating audiences if they challenge their information. This may
cause the public to perceive the agency and the non-participating audiences
as competing sources of information. This would provide a. credibility to
the non-participating audiences that may undermine that of the agency.
In addition, if the agency directly attacks the information of these
audiences they run the risk of being accused of stifling their opposition.
They may also be perceived as a powerful government authority with unlimited
resources forcing its will on powerless, local groups. This perception
will seriously damage their credibility.
Should the agency be asked by the media or other audiences about
the information or activities of non-participating audiences it should
diplomatically comment on the "alternative" information (but not on its
source) by referring to information in their own program.
2.4.6 Stage Four: Summary
The probable audience reactions and appropriate agency responses
in Stage Four of the public consultation program are summarized in Figure
Four. Appropriate techniques for the agency to employ in responding to
the audiences are also identified.
-------
FIGURE FOUR
STAGE FOUR: RESPONDING TO AUDIENCE REACTIONS
INITIAL INFORMATION DISSEMINATION IN STAGE TWO
~v
V
V
MONITORING OF AUDIENCE REACTION IN STAGE THREE
V
AUDIENCE
REACTION
(IN STAGE FOUR)
REQUESTS FOR
ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION
AGENCY
RESPONSE
provide additional
information
APPROPRIATE
TECHNIQUES
Information Centre
Information Kiosk
Information Kits
Briefing
Hotline
THE EMERGENCE OF
MISCONCEPTIONS
correct false informa-
tion from contextual
sources
identify and correct
misconceptions before
they become generally
accepted
V
DISCUSSION CENTRED
ON UNCERTAINTY AND
OPINION
isolate issues that
are based on opinion
acknowledge
uncertainty
Information Centre
Information Kiosk
Information Ki ts
Rriefing
Hotline
Infornvition Kits
Inforiu.it ion Cenl.ro
0
REFUSALS TO PARTICIPATE
AND PROVISION OF "ALTER-
NATIVE INFORMATION"
provide opportunities
for all groups to
participate
demonstrate the avail-
ability of information
to all audiences
monitor the information
of "alternative"
sources to be responded
to in the program and
at Stage 6
V
Informal ion C.-..Hrf
J
* The information ronlrnt of the techniques would probably vnry depending on the audience reaction.
-------
48
2.5 STAGE FIVE: EXPLORING SOLUTIONS AND RESOLVING ISSUES
2.5.1 Description
Stage Five of the program will only occur if it is initiated by an
audience requesting a role in problem-solving. Consequently, it will
frequently not be a part of the program. The program enters Stage
Five when an audience identifies issues that they feel should be open
to negotiation or suggests new approaches to resolving problems. The
emphasis at this stage is on problem-solving instead of informing. At
this point, the audiences generally adopt a more active role in the
program.
This stage of the program can contribute a great deal to the
agency's credibility. It can contribute to their being perceived as a
responsible authority open to community input in their efforts to
solve problems.
2..5.2 Stage Five: Goals
1. to provide an opportunity for audiences to participate
in problem-solving sessions to develop more acceptable
proposals.
2.5.3 The Timing of Stage Five
Problem-solving sessions would generally be held concurrent with
the latter part of Stage Four of the program. The timing is less
specific than other stages of the program. These are special sessions
scheduled at times convenient to participants while providing the agency
with sufficient time to prepare materials.
2.5.4 Information Content of Stage Five
Clearly, the appropriate information content at this stage is the
issue to be addressed in the problem-solving session. However, there
are three very important limitations that should govern the selection
of information content:
-------
In most situations, only a very few issues would be open
to joint problem solving. These will generally be site
planning concerns. The issues that are open to negoti-
ation must be clearly defined and it must be understood
by all parties that only certain, specified issues will
be dealt with in this stage of the program.
Issues should only be considered if the individuals par-
ticipating in joint problem-solving sessions are in a
position to make decisions on them. This is the case for
both proponents of the facility and the community. These
sessions will be of no value if people with authority to
make decisions are not available.
It must be understood that the problem-solving sessions
can not replace the final decision-making authority of
the public bodies or hearing boards that will eventually
rule on the proposed facility. This stage in the program
must be understood as an opportunity to resolve problems
prior to the final approvals process, but with a clear
recognition that any decision reached must be ratified
by the appropriate public authorities. This recognition
should guide the selection of appropriate issues for
Stage Five discussion. Clearly, in the view of the
approvals body, certain issues will not be open to
negotiation because they alone are in a position to
decide on them. Such issues should not be considered
in Stage Five.
It is extremely important that the agency carefully consider which
issues are open to joint problem-solving prior to initiating or agreeing
to Stage Five activity. The agency's credibility would be seriously
damaged if they withdrew an offer to negotiate issues, or placed string-
ent conditions on their consideration that removed any meaningful lati-
tude for compromise. If the agency can not, or believes that it can not,
get agreement on the necessary limitations of the negotiation process,
they would be well advised to avoid Stage Five endeavours and only con-
sider the various perspectives on issues during the approvals process.
It is worth noting that delaying the consideration of all issues until
the approvals stage eliminates what could be a major advantage of Stage
Five- of the public consultation program. There are a number of benefits
from providing an opportunity for audiences to resolve certain issues
prior to the approvals process. Stage Five activity can result in an
-------
50
approvals process that is focussed on specific, well defined issues. The
positions, and differences of opinion, of various parties will be clearly
understood. The necessity of introducing exhaustive, and sometimes ex-
traneous, evidence would be avoided. Consequently, a successful Stage
Five can enhance agency credibility as well as shorten the approvals
process.
2.5.5 Stage Five Audiences
The organized public and public interest groups are the most likely
audiences to participate in Stage Five.
2.5.6 Stage Five Techniques
Only problem-solving-techniques, as contrasted to information dis-
semination techniques, are appropriate in Stage Five. These are
described in Appendix One of the report.
-------
51
2.6 STAGE SIX: THE APPROVALS PROCESS
2.6.1 Description
The approvals process is included as Stage Six of the public consul-
tation program because it represents the end of the program. The
approvals process must be perceived as independent of the public consul-
tation program. The initiation of the approvals process will likely mark
the end of the formal publicconsultation program.* At this stage, the
dissemination of information should be complete and issues open to
negotiation resolved or at an impasse. The responsibility for decision-
making now rests with the approvals body.
The approvals process finalizes two earlier developments.
Firstly, the approvals process must formally ratify, or reject, any
decisions that were made in Stage Five of the program.
Secondly, it provides a forum for responding to the non-participating
audiences from Stage Four of the program. Issues over which there was
disagreement between the agency and the audience's interpretation can be
explored in detail. The information disseminated by non-participating
audiences can be thoroughly examined and contrasted to the agency's
information. In this sense, the approvals process provides the final
forum for publicly assessing and reporting on the program's information.
* Where the approvals process involves a quasi-judicial hearing it may
be legally necessary to terminate the program to ensure that infor-
mation is not seen as an attempt to influence an ongoing decision-
making process.
-------
APPENDIX ONE
PUBLIC CONSULTATION TECHNIQUES.
-------
APPENDIX ONE
PUBLIC CONSULTATION TECHNIQUES
INTRODUCTION
It is possible to differentiate between public consultation techniques
that are primarily suited to disseminating information and monitoring pub-
lic response and those that are appropriate for more detailed problem-
solving or issue resolution. The former category of information dissemi-
nation techniques, are used in Stages Two through Four of the public
consultation program. The latter category of problem-solving techniques
are generally used only in Stage Five of the program. This distinction
will be dealt with further in a following section.
Public consultation techniques cannot be strictly defined and their '
implementation cannot be outlined in precise detail. The techniques are
flexible. They can (and should) be molded to fit the requirements of
the specific situation. The same technique might be used in a variety
of ways in different public consultation programs. For this reason,
techniques have been classified into a limited number of major groupings
and options for implementation have been discussed within each of these
major groupings.
The techniques discussed in this part of the report have been
reviewed under the following headings:
Description
Purpose
Strengths
. Location (a physical location, when appropriate)
Information Available
Audiences Reached
Credibility Potential
Monitoring
Backfire Potential/Limitations
Costs
Options for Implementing the Technique
-------
53
3.1 GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING TECHNIQUES
3.1.1 Guidelines for the Organization of Information
A, series of guidelines will generally govern the organization of
information regardless of which technique is used for its dissemination.
The guidelines presented here apply to the techniques discussed in the
following section.
1. The sophistication of the audience should determine the
sophistication of the information they receive.
Clearly, highly technical and complex information of the type that
can be associated with hazardous waste management facilities will not be
understood by the majority of people with no expert training. Conse-
quently, technical information must be transformed into language a layman
can understand. This transformation should not result in over-simplifi-'
cation. The hazards and potential problems of the proposed facility must
not be understated in the transformation from technical to layman's
language. It may not be possible to accurately predict the sophistication
of the audience at the beginning of the program. Consequently, it may be
necessary that information of differing degrees of sophistication be
available for the audiences and that information be periodically "upgraded"
to conform to the increasing technical sophistication of particular
audiences throughout the program.
2. Information should be comparative and presented in terms
the audience can understand.
It is important that all information be expressed in terms that the
audience will understand.' Few people could immediately grasp the impli-
cations of a facility treating three thousand or thirty thousand gallons
of waste a day, except to understand the difference of magnitude as a
factor of ten. However, the figures take on a greater significance when
explained as the difference between two and ten trucks through their
-------
54
neighbourhood in a week. They are even more informative if expressed as
four times or ten times the number of trucks as are currently -passing
through their neighbourhood.
3. Whenever possible, information should be presented visually
or graphically.
Complex information is much easier understood if visually displayed.
Information that is easily understood is more readily accepted and re-
tained. "Unclear information may also reflect poorly on the agency's
competence and credibility.
4. All agency information must be presented in neutral language.
The audiences will be sensitive to information that does not appear
to be objective. The agency's credibility will be damaged if it is not
perceived to be objective.
5. When there- are two sides to an issue, both sides should be
presented. The agency's point of -view should be presented
last.
The reasons for presenting both sides of an issue have been dealt
with earlier. The presentation of the opposing point of view first re-
assures the audience that their opinions are recognized and therefore
generally increases their attentiveness when the agency's view is
discussed.
t
6. All agency information must be the best available and
current.
Agency information must always be the best available and current
to enhance the audiences' perception of theiri expertise and protect
their credibility.
-------
55
3.1.2 Information Dissemination Techniques:
Principles for Implementation
Information dissemination techniques that display some potentiai fa-
use in issues of hazardous waste management are discussed in the follow-
ing section. The techniques have not been ranked in order of their
utility for this type of issue, however, as a general rule, those that
maximize the following characteristics are the preferred techniques:
a) Agency-Audience Interaction. The techniques that stress
direct, one-to-one contact between the source of infor-
mation and the audience are preferred. This approach
will increase the clarity of the information dissemi-
nated; increase its relevance to the audience; and
increase the audience's understanding and acceptance
of information.
b) Audience Involvement in the Program. The preferred tech-
niques provide the audience with a means to become actively
involved in the program (e.g., fill out a response card;
ask an official a question, etc.) instead of being treated
as passive receptors of information. This will generally
increase the audience's retention and acceptance of
information.
c) Visual Displays of Information. The techniques that con-
vey information with visual aids in addition to the written
and spoken word are preferred. This will generally in-
crease the audience's understanding and acceptance of the
information.
On the basis of these criteria, the techniques discussed in this
section in order of increasing preference are:
Information Kits
Information Kiosks
Hotlines
Briefings
Information Centres.
-------
56
3.2 INFORMATION DISSEMINATION TECHNIQUES
3.2.1 Information Kits
Description
The information kit is a package of written and visual information
that is usually collected by the audience. It is self-explanatory and
involves no direct audience-agency interaction. (Of course, kits may be
used in combination with other techniques such as the Information Centre
where interaction and further explanation is available.) The kits can
theoretically deal with any topic and be of any length, however, there
are some practical limitations.
Purpose
The purpose of the information kit is to disseminate in a convenient
and economical manner basic information concerning the proposed facility
to a wide audience.
Strengths
The kit can. reach a wide audience.
The kit is flexible - its content can be altered to
reflect the special interests of particular audiences
or new issues as they emerge in the consultation program.
The kit can act as a catalyst for informed discussion -
it may serve as a focus for the discussion of issues
amongst neighbours or friends. If well designed, it
can restrict the spread of rumours by widely distributing
agency information.
Well-conceived and presented information can increase
awareness and knowledge quickly and efficiently, par-
ticularly if technical information is visually trans-
lated into terms understandable to laymen (e.g., the
way National Geographic or Time Magazine present
technical information.)
Information Available
The kits are only appropriate for providing basic information on
the proposed facility.
-------
57
Audiences Reached
Information kits are suitable for all audiences, but will generally
be used for the general public and organized public.
Credibility Potential - Low.
The kits provide little opportunity for audience interaction or in-
volvement. Consequently, they have low credibility potential and should
normally be used in conjunction with other, high credibility, techniques.
In conjunction with other techniques, the kit can contribute to agency
credibility by indicating that the agency is attempting to communicate
openly about the proposed facility as well as acquainting audiences with
the other opportunities for receiving information in the program.
Costs
The production of kits may be expensive. The content must be care-
fully selected and well presented. The costs include:
Considerable staff time, experience and expertise in
translating technical and in many circumstances con-
troversial information for general public consumption.
Cost of translating materials to other languages
(if necessary).
Costs of designing the kit (visuals, graphics, art-
work, etc.) .
Costs of printing, reproduction, etc.
Costs of mailing, obtaining mailing lists, etc. (only
if kits are mailed).
Costs of distribution (if other than by mail).
Monitoring
There is no way to directly monitor the impact of information kits.
They can only be monitored when used in conjunction with other techniques
like Information Centres.
-------
58
Backfire Potential/Limitations
The inability to monitor the reaction to the information kit is a major
limitation because poorly prepared or poorly presented information could
give rise to unfounded fears or alarm amongst the general public. To
minimize this risk, it is probably necessary to limit the information
content of the kit to rather simple, easily explained issues. In addi-
tion, if the kit is to be easily distributed its size and content will
probably have to be restricted.
Another danger is that the information flow is one way and this places
restrictions on public interaction with the agency. If the information is
too self-serving or technical, it may raise suspicions about the credibility
of the agency. Moreover,if the audiences feel they are being overwhelmed
with publicity from an agency that appears to have unlimited funds, the
agency's credibility may be damaged. Information kits in isolation have
a number of drawbacks but, in concert with other techniques, they can be-
come an essential part of a well designed program.
Information Kits: Options for Implementation
The two options relate to the manner of distributing the kits, and
the audiences they are directed to.
1. Mailed Information Kit
The mailed kit suffers from two major drawbacks. Except in small
i
municipalities, the cost of preparing and distributing material may be
prohibitive. In addition, unlike all other techniques where individuals
request information, the entire population would receive a mailed kit.
This might unduly raise concerns amongst a large number of people if
they misunderstand the information. In a community with residents of
different socio-economic status, mother tongue, education, etc., it
would be difficult to provide one self-explanatory package of informa-
tion for all groups. Language differences and difficulties in deter-
mining a single, appropriate level of sophistication for all audiences
increase the possibility that the kits will be misunderstood.
-------
59
2. Special Interest Kits
In addition to the basic information kit, special interest kits
might be prepared for individual audiences whose concerns can be anti-
cipated or become evident in the course of the program. These kits
could include the basic model with pages inserted to answer questions
of special interest (e.g., the impact of the facility on a particular
industry in the community or a more technical description of the facility
for local experts). These special kits would only be distributed to the
audiences for whom they were designed.
-------
60
3.2.2 Information Kiosk
Description
The information kiosk is basically a sophisticated distribution point
for information packages. (Alternatively, it may be viewed as an unsophis-
ticated, and unstaffed, information centre.) The kiosk must be sturdy,
visible and able to accommodate the materials it is intended to distribute.
Purpose
Like the Information Kit, the main purpose of an Information -Kiosk is
to provide basic information on the proposed facility. It should lead to
public awareness and education about the facility. The kiosk may also be-
come the site of a local forum for communications about the proposed
project and may stimulate informed discussion. The information available
at the kiosk can evolve with the project as monitoring mechanisms enable'
content to continually change to be more relevant to the audiences' needs
and interests.
Strengths
Similar to the information' kit, but with greater loca-
tional flexibility. The content can be altered to
reflect specific concerns and interests in local areas
throughout the community.
Location ,
The best locations are where people from the community meet. For
example, a local bus terminal, the regional shopping centre, the recrea-
tion centre in. a. small community, a library, and in special circumstances,
government buildings such as the post office. The best locations are
accessible, suitable for transmitting information to pedestrians, and
provided with a focal point where people may gather.
Information Available
The kiosk is best suited to provide basic information on the pro-
posed facility. However, it offers great flexibility in the presenta-
tion of the information.
-------
61
The kiosk may be used for visual and verbal displays of information and
might contain: basic information kits; special topic kits relevant ro
the local community where the kiosk is located; maps; photographs; slide
and sound shows; an answering service or questionnare to register
comments; telephones with taped answers to frequently asked questions;
and, a question/answer machine of some type such as a Directomat*.
Audiences Reached
Primarily the general public.
Credibility Potential - Low
The kiosk does not usually provide an opportunity for audiences to
express opinions or ask for additional information. The information
flow is one-way and impersonal. Consequently, the potential for estab- '
lishing agency credibility is low. However, the kiosk should not damage
agency' credibility. It is a visible sign of the agency's commitment to
communicate with the public. It may also provide an opportunity for the
agency to display its expertise if the information provided is useful,
readable and perceived as accurate.
Costs
- Cost of the kiosk itself
- Cost of the brochures, handouts, etc.
Costs of translating materials to other languages
(if necessary)
- Costs of photographs, maps and other visual materials
- Costs of maintaining and/or renting slide or film strip
projectors, tape decks or more sophisticated equipment
- Cost of security (if necessary)
- Cost of maintaining the kiosk.
A Directomat is a random-access information retrieval machine with a
capacity of 120 answer plates that will select and print a take-away
card when any of the question buttons on the face of a machine are
pressed.
-------
62
Monitoring
There are several monitoring techniques for the information kiosk.
Basic monitoring procedures could include: counting the number of in-
formation kits taken; or, analysing response to questionnaires, the content
of taped messages or the questions asked of the Directomat. More unob-
trusive measures include: the discussion in the vicinity of the kiosk;
the extent to which it is vandalized; and, grafitti on the kiosk.
Backfire Potential/Limitations
The kiosk suffers from the same basic limitations as information
kits. If the information is not comprehensive, too complex, or not
oriented to the needs of the audience using the kiosk it may give rise
to misconceptions or be ignored. Also, without the opportunity for per-
sonal interaction and explanation, the kiosk is only suited to simple,
non-technical information.
-------
63
3.2.3 Hotline
Description
A Hotline is a telephone service where callers can receive answer-;.
to particular questions or listen to a recorded announcement. The
Hotline may be in operation during standard office hours, connected to
a telephone answering service or available 24 hours a day. The tele-
phone number should be circulated to the public through the other
information dissemination techniques and the media.
The number should be toll free, particularly in rural areas.
Purpose
The Hotline is mainly used to answer specific questions from the
general public. The questions could be answered directly by a staff
person receiving the calls. Alternatively, the questions could be re-
corded, researched by staff, and answers provided with a return phone
call. The Hotline may also be useful in Stage Four of the program to
record and distribute information such as the hours and location of the
information centre. Callers could dial the "Hotline" and receive a
tape-recorded message with this information.
Strengths
It can reach a wide audience
It is the most convenient way for audience members
to receive information
It guarantees the audiences' anonymity
Costs are difficult to determine but it can be
relatively inexpensive
It can provide a quick response to emerging misconceptions.
Location
Usually, from the caller's perspective, there is no specific
location. However, a Hotline might be located in an information kiosk
to provide people with an opportunity to ask questions related to the
information at the kiosk.
-------
64
Information Available
The Hotline is generally available to answer questions on any issue.
The information requested from the Hotline by callers will constantly
change as new issues are raised. Consequently, there is little danger
that Hotline information will become outdated or irrelevant. Without
visual aids it will be difficult to answer technical questions by tele-
phone and there is some danger that answers will be misconstrued.
Audiences Reached
The Hotline will be used primarily by the general public, but calls
might also be received from the organized public, special interest groups
and public interest groups.
Credibility Potential - Medium
If the. callers are able to engage agency officials in a constructive
conversation on a one-to-one basis, their questions may be answered and
they may have a good opportunity to express their opinions. This will
enhance agency credibility. (Obviously, the tape-recorded messages do
not provide this opportunity for involvement. Moreover, having to leave
a name or question with an answering service might alienate a number of
callers.)
The credibility potential will be increased the more hours a day
the Hotline is operational at times that are convenient to the audiences.
Costs
- Cost of telephone installation, recording service,
answering service and regional toll free service
- The advertising of the Hotline number
The salary paid to agency staff who deal with the
callers
The salary (time) of the experts who may have to
be contacted to answer questions from callers.
-------
65
Monitoring
The Hotline is especially good for monitoring public reaction if
the number of calls and their substance are analyzed.
Backfire Potential/Limitations
The Hotline can damage agency credibility if the audiences' questions
are not sensitively answered. Audiences may also view the telephone ser-
vice as a barrier between them and the agency.
The Hotline also suffers from some limitations in the complexity of
information it can relay to audiences because of the absence of visual
aids.
Hotlines: Options for Implementation
The Hotline options relate primarily to whether a person or a
mechanical device answers, and where the calls are directed.
1. Personal Answer vs Answering Machine
A person responding to callers' inquiries is preferrable to
collecting them on an answering machine. The more personal response can
be less alienating and consequently should reflect more positively on
the agency. However, the answering machine would probably be less ex-
pensive and would be available twenty-four hours daily. A combination
of both approaches might be most desirable.
2. Proponents Office, Government Office or Community Centre
The Hotline could be answered by experts at the office of the pro-
ponent or governments authority responsible for the proposed facility,
or at a local community office staffed by agency personnel or community
residents without formal expertise in hazardous waste management.
The advantage of the office of the proponent or government authority
is that knowledgeable persons can be available to immediately answer the
caller's question. The disadvantages include the fact that these offices
are usually only open business hours; the office experts may be busy or
-------
occupied with other projects; and some callers might hesitate phoning
these offices, particularly if . they are opposed to the facility. The
advantage of calls being placed to a local community office associated
with the information program is that it may have greater credibility for
the caller and it is more likely to be open at convenient times for the
caller. The people at the local office need not be experts in hazardous
waste facilities if they have access to experts when they require infor-
mation. There may be an advantage to having people without waste
management expertise answer the audiences' questions. Agency people
without expertise are more likely to force the experts to answer questions
carefully, clearly and in an understandable manner for laymen. Conse-
quently, the agency can avoid the danger of alienating audiences with
technical information they cannot understand.
If it is 'possible to have the phones at the local community office .
manned by community residents, the credibility .of the process would be
greatly enhanced.
-------
67
3.2.4 Briefings
Description
Large group or public meetings as formats for disseminating inrc .<:>. -
tion on hazardous waste management facilities are ineffective because they
offer too little audience involvement and interaction with the agency.
They should be avoided.
However, briefings can be effective in hazardous waste management
cases if the number of participants are restricted and the issues to be
discussed are generally defined. (In this situation, the briefing is
similar to the workshop - discussed below - except there is no attempt
to resolve issues or solve problems.)
The briefing is an appropriate mechanism for a focussed discussion
of issues with organized publics, local experts, public interest groups,
and perhaps, politicians. The briefing can be initiated by either the .
audience or the agency.
Purpose
The briefing should provide specific relevant information to a par-
ticular audience. Often it will be possible to meet with representatives
of a specific audience (e.g., the executive of an environmental or
community organization, or the Chamber of Commerce), and rely on the
representatives to disseminate information to their membership. This
is a simple, cost-effective method of disseminating information to large
audiences with unique interests.
A well organized and constructive briefing can provide a mechanism
for informing the organized publics and may enhance agency credibility.
Strengths
Information directly relevant to the audience is
disseminated
There is potential for interaction and involvement,
as well as specific questionning
It is an effective and efficient manner to provide
information to a potentially large audience through
representatives the audience trusts and accepts.
-------
68
Location
The briefing may be held at the offices of the audience or the
agency's Information Centre or a neutral area like a school, church,
town meeting hall or local club. While a relatively neutral location
may be desirable, in the case of hazardous waste facilities the location
probably will not have a great impact on the attitudes of those attend-
ing the meeting.
Information Available
The information that is made available is related to the specific
interests of the audience.
Audiences Reached
Audiences could include the organized public, public interest
groups, and in some cases local experts and politicians.
Credibility Potential - High
The small group format of the briefing should provide an opportunity
for high levels of audience involvement and interaction, and consequently,
enhance agency credibility. However, if the audience is hostile, agency
credibility will largely be determined by the abilities of their repre-
sentatives at the briefing. In addition to being technically competent,
the representatives must:
be honest, open, and responsive throughout the meetings
not attempt to hide proposals that might receive negative
reaction
. be willing to listen to the community's concerns and
try to address them
be sensitive to the audience's concerns
be well prepared to discuss the technical aspects of
the facility
be prepared for hostile reactions and maintain their
authority without becoming defensive or uncommunicative.
-------
69
Costs
Costs for briefings can vary widely depending on the information
content, preparation required, and number of staff needed to be in
attendance.
Costs of renting the meeting place, audio-visual
aids, etc.
Costs of displays and development of written materials
Costs of staff time.
Monitoring
At the majority of these briefings the dialogue will take place in
lay terms, and audiences will freely express their views. Consequently.
the agency may be provided with significant insights into how these
audiences view the agency and the proposed facility.
Staffing
The briefings require skill and sensitivity from the agency repre-
sentatives in their chairing and planning. In addition, the careful
preparation of visual aids and written material is of importance. If
the agency staff is inadequately prepared or not skilled in open meeting
dynamics, their response to difficult questions and their reaction to
hostility or anger on the part of some audiences may damage their
credibility.
It may be desirable to identify a single individual who would take
the lead role in organizing and running these meetings. He can develop
and maintain contacts with organized publics, public interest groups and
local experts. In addition, attaching such an individual to the project
is usually a sign that there is a strong commitment to audience involve-
ment on the part of the agency.
However, there is a danger in that the success of the meeting will
rest on the capability of one person. Given that hazardous waste
management facilities are highly controversial, it may be difficult to
find the person with the diplomatic skills, the technical knowledge, the
credibility, and the personality to relate to a wide variety of audiences,
and to cope with the constant pressures such a role involves.
-------
70
Backfire Potential/Limitations
Briefings must be skillfully managed. They will .probably require
a high level of preparation and a more detailed type of information
than other techniques. There are chances for misunderstanding and
disagreements. Meetings of this kind, particularly if hostile and
uncommunicative,can cause long-term disruption in the relations
betveen the agency and the audience.
-------
71
3^2.5 Drop-In Information Centre
Description
The Drop-In Centre is a point where the audiences can receive in-
formation on all issues concerning the proposed facility. The "Centre1
might be a desk next to the Information Kiosk, a booth in a shopping
mall, an office in a local social service agency, a rented store-front.
or a very large office where workshops and other meetings could be held.
While larger, self-contained centres are preferable, the essential
characteristics of the centre are a permanent location and the availa-
bility of staff to answer questions. Drop-In Information Centres should
be located in an accessible place for as many local residents as possible.
It should be a place that is generally thought of as neutral (i.e. the
Centre is generally not located in a branch or regional office of a
government authority).
Purpose
At the minimum, the Centre is a place for information dissemination.
It should optimize opportunities for various audiences to become actively
involved in the program. The Centre might also serve as the co-ordina-
ting point for the public consultation program. The Hotline might be based
at the Centre and it could be used for briefings or workshops.
Strengths
The Centre can provide a flexible means for audiences to
become informed, at their convenience on the issues most
important to them
If large enough, in terms of available material and staff,
it should be appropriate for answering all questions, re-
gardless of their complexity.
It provides a means for maximizing audience interaction
and involvement with the agency. It is a technique that
can contribute to agency credibility
It can serve as a focus for the entire public consulta-
tion program
It can be a visible indication of the agency's commitment
to making information available.
-------
72
Location
As noted above, the Centre should be in an accessible and neutral
location. If a large geographical area must be covered a trailer which
changes locations from time to time might be used.
Information Available
Information on all issues can be disseminated from the Centre. The
Centre should have a variety of exhibits, charts, maps, written documents,
reports, brochures, and staff available so that audiences can have their
questions answered at their convenience. The setting should be very
informal.
Audiences Reached
While the general public would be the major user, visits from media,
organized publics and special interest groups would also be expected.
There may be several periods in the process where audience interest
peaks. (For example, immediately after the announcement of the proposed
facility.) At these times the Centre would be of the most use. The
hours of operation should be adjusted to the needs of the community; for
example, housewives might drop in in the afternoon, but others would
more likely visit in the evenings or on weekends.
Credibility Potential - High
The Centre demonstrates a commitment on the part of the agency to
share information with interested audiences. If the information provided
addresses audience concerns, the agency's credibility may be enhanced in
the community. The Centre provides a means for the audience to interact
directly with agency staff. Consequently, they can discuss their con-
cerns exhaustively with agency staff and have ample opportunity to state
their point of view. This high level of interaction can contribute to
agency credibility.
-------
73
Costs
Cost of renting an appropriate site for the expected
time period
Cost of preparing the site, buying the proper equip-
ment, furniture and materials plus the cost of
maintenance
Cost of photographs, maps and other materials
Staff costs.
Monitoring
The Centre should provide numerous opportunities for monitoring
audience reaction. The number, type and sophistication of audience
inquiries could be measured. In addition, because of their daily con-
tact with the public, the Centre personnel should be in an unequalled
position to gauge the temper of the audiences and their information needs
Staff
The Centre should be staffed by people capable of answering ques-
tions, sensitive to audience reactions and capable of transmitting rele-
vant information from and asking questions of expert personnel. These
staff people could be volunteers from community groups, a professional
coordinator hired specifically for the purpose, staff from a regional
office or a staff member who has been specially trained for running a
Drop-In Information Centre.
Backfire Potential/Limitations
The success of the Centre will largely be dependent on its'staff.
If the staff is sensitive to audience concerns and effectively answers
their questions, the Centre can be a most useful technique for dissemi-
nating information. The personnel at the Centre must also be in close
touch with technical and political decision-makers to insure they do
not raise public expectations that can not or will not be fulfilled.
-------
74
Drop-In Information Centre.: Options for Implementation
The Information Centre's hours of operation, number of staff, budget
for visual displays, meeting space, etc. may differ. The major factor
here is the availability of resources. As a general rule,' the amount of
information disseminated and its acceptance and retention will increase
with longer hours of operation, and more staff, display area and space.
However, there is one important qualification. The Centre should avoid
being perceived as an expensive public relations effort. It may be
difficult to determine the public's perception of the Centre. However,
the Centre should be planned to be in scale and character with the
community and the information monitoring process should be sensitive to
charges of the Centre being a public relations effort.
In addition to the above variations, Centres may differ according
to the extent of staffing and the expert qualifications and affiliations
of the staff.
Fully Staffed Centres vs Exhibition Centres: While a Centre could oper-
ate solely on an "exhibition" basis where audiences view displays and
pick up information, it is preferable that the Centre be continually
staffed to answer questions and listen to audience comments. If the
Centre is not fully staffed it loses its potential for establishing
credibility and for responding to complex questions.
Staff from the Community vs Agency Staff: The advantage of employing
staff from the' local community is that they have an immediate appreci-
ation of the community's perspective and usually stronger credibility
with residents than agency staff. Agency staff may have the advantage
of being more familiar with the issues and may be more effective in
getting answers to questions. Increased agency sensitivity to local
issues and contact with local citizenry can probably be best obtained
through a combination of local community staff and agency personnel.
-------
75
Expert Staff Connected with the Proposed Facility vs Outside Experts:
Audiences will want access to experts whom they trust to comment on
technical matters. Local experts can play this role if they exist in
the community. If they do not, or choose not to become involved in the
program, the audiences are left with experts affiliated with the facili-;
or outside experts.
Normally, those affiliated with the facility can play the role of
agency experts. However, agency experts must win the trust of audiences
through personal contacts or the agency may have to bring in people who
are perceived by the community as neutral resource persons. The agency
might make other experts available to the audiences through the
Information Centre. If the agency is willing and able to provide tech-
nical assistance to the audiences on a basis they can accept, the
assistance should help to develop trust and agency credibility.
The provision of expertise from an external source could be espe-
cially important in Stage Five of the program when joint problem-solving
efforts are undertaken.
-------
76
3.3 PROBLEM-SOLVING TECHNIQUES
Problem solving techniques are a special category of public consul-
tation techniques. Through these techniques it is possible for the agency
and one or more audiences to exchange information in search of mutually
acceptable solutions to problems. As was pointed out earlier, these
techniques would generally be used in Stage Five of the program, and
probably to resolve site planning issues.
The problem-solving techniques are superior to the information dis-
semination techniques in that they provide for higher levels of agency-
audience interaction and greater possibilities for active audience
involvement. In addition, the problem-solving techniques are appropriate
for dealing with the technical and/or complex information that would be
required in a problem solving setting.
The most appropriate problem-solving technique for hazardous waste
management issues is the Workshop.
3.3.1 Workshops
Description
The Workshop provides an opportunity for the audience and the agency to
thoroughly explore a problem and search for a mutually acceptable solution.
In most cases, this would involve arriving at a new approach to handling a
particular problem that would better address a concern raised by the
audience. For example, the agency and the audience might explore ways of
decreasing the impact of trucks travelling through a particular neighbour-
hood on their way to the facility. After considering the problem in a
workshop session, the agency and audience might recommend a new road
alignment or different routes of access to the facility. Workshops must
be focussed on specific, well defined issues. In most cases, these will
be site planning issues.
The participants will usually be required to work with information
to deal with specific problems. Participants should be provided with
appropriate background material prior to the workshop so that progress
-------
77
can be made in solving problems. In addition, alternative approaches to
dealing with the problem should be described prior to the workshop
session. This might be done in an initial meeting prior Co the problem--
solving sessions or in written material distributed to participants.
The number of workshop sessions required to address the problems
will likely depend on the complexity of the issues being considered and
the number of alternatives being proposed to deal with the problems.
Purpose
The Workshop may provide a means for resolving negotiable issues
prior to the approvals process. If this is possible, it will enhance
agency credibility by demonstrating their willingness to work with the
community to solve problems. It may also decrease the time and effort
that must be devoted to assessing the facility during the approvals
stage.
Strengths
The workshop provides a controlled setting for issue
resolution prior to the approvals stage
The workshop, through encouraging issue resolution, can
greatly enhance agency credibility.
Location
A Workshop can be conducted at a Drop-In Information Centre or, if
necessary, some more neutral setting. Holding the session in the Drop-In
Centre might simplify the mechanics of setting up the session. Neutral
sites for workshops may be necessary if the audience is hostile or
uncooperative.
Information Available
The information available at the workshop will relate to the prob-
lem under discussion. It is important that the best information avail-
able be provided and that it be comprehensive and 'oriented to the
specific problem being considered at the workshop. There may be a need
for maps, displays, graphs, etc.
-------
78
Audiences Reached
The Workshop is most useful for involving Che organized public or
public interest groups in the process of issue resolution.
Workshops generally have a limited number (10-15) of participants.
This is necessary if complex issues are to be discussed and progress is
to be made towards issue resolution. However, the participants may
represent a larger audience (e.g., the executive of a community associa-
tion or environmental group) and assume responsibility for reporting to
their membership. It may also be possible to accommodate larger numbers
of participants (25-100) if the agency has sufficient workshop leaders
and materials to subdivide the participants into separate working groups.
Credibility Potential - High
Levels of involvement"and interaction are maximized. Consequently,.
the Workshop can provide audiences with accurate and detailed informa-
tion while protecting agency credibility in a. joint problem-solving
situation.
Costs
- Preparation of material and design costs
Rental fees for meeting rooms, tape recorders, etc.
- Postage, phone bills, etc.
- Staff costs.
Monitoring
Workshops are focussed on specific issues and are directed to the
resolution of those issues. Consequently, there is no necessity to
monitor the audience's reaction to information that has been disseminated,
It may be necessary to monitor reaction to the workshop's outcome, par-
ticularly if it proves impossible to reach a mutually satisfactory
compromise on an issue.
-------
79
Staffing
The Workshop should be directed by a skilled moderator. A success-
ful moderator will be trained to exercise subtle control over the dis-
cussion. The moderator is responsible for keeping the discussion on topic;
controlling hostile or aggressive exchanges between participants; insuring
that all participants have an opportunity to state their point of view; and,
moving the discussion towards consensus or, if this is not possible, ident-
ifying points that can not be resolved.
An effective moderator should be perceived as neutral by all Workshop
participants. This may demand that trained moderators who have not pre-
viously been associated with the public consultation program be recruited
for Workshop sessions.
Backfire Potential/Limitations
The Workshop is the appropriate technique for Stage Five of the
public consultation program. It has been stressed earlier that Stage
Five of the program should only be initiated if the issues to be dis-
cussed are clearly defined and the participants are in a position to
make decisions in aid of resolving the issues. If these circumstances
do not exist, a Stage Five workshop will not be successful and may
damage the agency's credibility. The perceived trustworthiness of the
agency will be threatened if the workshop participants feel they were
mislead into believing that certain issues were negotiable.
In addition to the potential problems that are associated with
initiating Stage Five of the program, the Workshop technique has a
number of limitations.
The number of Workshop participants will probably have to be. re-
stricted to those audiences with a direct interest in the problem being
discussed. Consequently, the agency may alienate uninvited groups (who
might represent a substantial part of the audience). This may be avoid-
ed if the uninvited groups have sufficient access to the public consulta-
tion program in Stage Four. It might also be possible to allow the
uninvited groups to send non-participating observers to the Workshops,
or provide them with written summaries of the Workshops' recommendations.
This would allow uninvited groups to comment on the Workshops' activities
and recommendations.
-------
80
Finally, the effectiveness of the Workshop is very1 dependent on
the discussion leader. The leader must focus participants' attention
(
on the particular problem being discussed and encourage! them to reach
consensus on a solution to the problem or to identify the points on
which there is no agreement.
-------
81
3.4 WORKING WITH THE MEDIA*
3.4.1 The Context
The controversial nature of hazardous waste management makes it a
'favourite topic for the media. To date, the media has reported more
negative stories in this area than positive ones. Consequently, the
agency might distrust or simply wish to avoid the media. In public
information this is neither possible nor desirable.
The public consultation program aims at developing a knowledgeable,
well informed public. To accomplish this, the agency must create a. good
working relationship with the media. The failure to do so could damage
the success of the present undertaking and undermine the long-term
credibility of the agency.
There.are procedures.that can assist the agency in establishing a
co-operative working relationship with the mass media. These procedures
will be discussed in this section of the report.
3.4.2 Providing Service to the Media
Having assumed a positive attitude towards the news media, the next
important requirement is to understand how to serve all the media. It
is usually not possible, or desirable, to concentrate on only one medium.
However, to serve them all with information, their different needs must
be recognized.
The Press
The media will be involved in all stages of the program. Press
releases, information kits and briefings are some of the techniques that
can be used to provide the media with information.
* This section of the report is adapted from: William' H. Gilbert,
"Working with the News Media" in Citizen Participation Certification
for Community Development. P. Marshall (ed.) Washington, D.C.:
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials, 1977,
pp. 106-116.
-------
82
The agency should make available information on the impacts of the
proposed facility and suggest ideas for features and pictures. The
agency should also serve as a source of expert material on hazardous
wastes and be available to answer any questions.
Complicated or technical information should be given to reporters
in time for them to contact appropriate staff members with questions be-
fore they write their stories.
The agency should attempt to schedule press releases or briefing
sessions to accommodate newspaper deadlines. A story intended for a
morning paper should be received by noon the day before publication.
For afternoon papers, the story should be received by six a.m. on the
day of publication.
Weekly papers usually publish on Thursday and require their infor-
mation by Tuesday. Consequently, information released on a Wednesday
will not generally be published in the weekly newspaper. Weekly news-
papers often play a very important role in smaller communities and their
publication schedule should be respected.
Radio and Television
Radio news is usually brief and often involves little reporter
coverage of events. Many stations depend on the wire services, press
releases, and telephone tape interviews. If radio station coverage is
desired, an agency member should be prepared to deliver a brief, clear
statement for taping by a reporter or over the telephone. The agency's
interests are best served if they can avoid having the statement edited.
Consequently, it should be limited to two or three sentences that are
carefully prepared and effectively read by agency personnel.
If television coverage is required by the agency to disseminate
information, visual materials such as maps, charts, graphs, photographs
and slides should be available.
Advance notice is required for television news coverage. It must
be early enough in the day to allow time for film 'processing or TV
editing if the reporter is to air the story that same evening.
-------
83
3.4.4 Press Conferences or Briefings
The agency representative presiding at a press conference should
have a thorough grasp of the subject and should ensure that senior
technical staff are available in case it is necessary to elaborate on
specific points. The technical personnel need not play a major role
in the press conference but should be available if they are needed.
The agency representatives presiding at the press conference should
be prepared for predictable questions. While not all media questions can
be anticipated, some are fairly standard. At a press conference concerned
with hazardous waste facilities some of the following questions might be
expected. (Note the manner in which the questions are asked as well as
the content. Media questions often tend to be phrased in an accusing
manner. The agency representative should be prepared for this.)
Why is this facility required?
Why is it being located in this community?
What type of waste will be handled at the site?
Did this community actually produce the wastes?
What guarantees do you have that this effort will
work when other efforts have failed?
What will be the costs and benefits for the community?
Isn't it a fact that this problem is so big and so
complex that no one knows the answers?
How much did you say this will cost, and where is the
money coming from?
What happens if what you are announcing today fails?
Doesn't this effort duplicate the work that is going
on in X?
Are you doing this because you think it is necessary
or because the federal or provincial agency in charge
said it has to be done here or located here?
What are the businesses who produce the waste doing
about the problem?
What do you think will happen with your recommendations?
Were any citizens involved in these recommendations?
-------
84
The site of the press conference must be appropriate for media
coverage. Attractive, easy-to-read visuals should be displayed in a
number of colours and preferably on a light blue background to reduce
glare for the television cameras. Horizontal displays are more suitable
for television coverage. If possible, visuals should be available in
black and white glossy, 8 x 10 inch prints for newspapers. Stories with
photographs or other visual material are more likely to attract tele-
vision and news space.
Special provisions must be made for television coverage (e.g., a
place for microphones, lights, sufficient electrical outlets, etc.).
These should be checked with the T.V. news crew prior to the conference.
The information that the agency feels is relevant is more likely to get
on the air if T.V. reporters are provided with a copy of the news con-
ference proceedings indicating the main points. The agency might also
offer to arrange a special session with the reporters where speakers can
briefly state important points for a film clip.
3.4.4 Press Releases
Press releases should be written in simple straightforward language
appropriate for printing directly in the paper. The release should
address reader concerns and questions. The release itself should be
short, preferably one or two pages, and double-spaced. The name, title,
and telephone number of the offical to contact for more information
should be given at the end of the article. Finally, it should never be
assumed that a press release has been clearly understood. All releases
must be followed with reporter contacts to ensure the content was under-
standable and there are no further questions.
3.4.5 Public Affairs Broadcasts
The regulations of the Canadian Radio, Television, and Telecommuni-
cations Commission require radio and television stations to devote a
certain amount of their broadcast time to public interest items. Hotline
Radio shows, local interview radio shows, community cable television
-------
85
shows and television interview or public affairs programs can be an
effective means of increasing public awareness and responding to public
reaction or misconceptions concerning the proposed facility.
3.4.6 Unfavourable Media Stories
There is very little that can be done about stories criticizing the
agency or the proposed facility. An agency-newspaper conflict will only
undermine che agency's credibility.
However, several avenues are open to an agency seriously concerned
about responding to a particularly harmful or misleading story. In the
case of the newspaper there is always the letter to the editor. If this
means is chosen, the letter should be sent soon after the article appears,
should remain brief (one or two paragraphs at the most), and, should
indicate the name and title of the official in whose name the letter
is being sent.
Several factors must be considered when choosing this approach.
Letters to the editor are not always published. If the letter is pub-
lished, the paper has the option of editing it to suit space limitations.
The paper may choose to publish the letter in its original form and
respond to it in their editorial section. This editorial advantage may
explain why many letters to the editor are composed but few are sent.
A more effective means of dealing with a harmful or misleading article
is to deal directly with the reporter responsible for the story or his
editor. Often a personal phone call or visit can succeed in establishing
a new, more favourable relationship with the media. Reporters and
editors are concerned with the welfare of their community and are not
necessarily opposed to the agency. Bad news or controversial items are
more likely to be aired or printed but a good working relationship with
the media should not be jeopardized by an occasional criticism of the
agency or the proposed facility.
-------
86
3.4.7 Agency Staff and the Press
To minimize the possibility of inaccurate information appearing in
the media, the agency should adopt a policy regarding who will speak to
the news media. An intelligent, objective policy will assist the
reporter in getting information and guarantee the agency that informa-
tion received by the media is from responsible senior staff.
The following are some staff guidelines that may be useful:
1. It is not essential that professional staff clear every contact
with the media; however, they should restrict their comments to
matters related to their own areas of expertise.
2. Staff members should not answer policy questions since policy
is established by the elected officials or company boards.
3. Media groundrules should include some indication regarding who
on the staff is maintaining media contacts, the subject of dis-
cussion and the content. This will ensure that agency information
officers keep abreast of information given to the media.
-------
SELECTED
BIBLIOGRAPHY
-------
87
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Part One: The General Public Consultation Model and Principles for
Design Program
The following-are general references that deal with information
models and factors that influence an audience's acceptance and retention
of information.
Abelson, H. and M. Karlins (1970) Persuasion: How Opinions and Attitudes
are Changed. 2nd. ed. New York: Springer.
Applebaum, R. and K. Anatol (1974) Strategies for Persuasive Communication.
Columbus: Merrill.
Hovland, C., I.L. Janis and H.H. Kelley (1953) Communication and
Persuasion. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lerbinger, 0. (1972) Designs for Persuasive Communication. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc. ;
Katz, D. (1960). "The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitudes",
Public Opinion Quarterly. 24:163-204.
Appendix One; Public Consultation Techniques
There are a number of catalogues of public participation and infor-
mation techniques. However, these catalogues do not deal specifically
with techniques appropriate for contentious issues. Some of the public
consultation techniques described in Appendix One of the report have been
adapted for use in contentious situations from the following:
Consultantgroup Ltd. (nd) Involvement: A Saksatchewan Perspective.
Regina: Department of the Environment, Govt. of Saskatchewan.
Marshall, Patricia (ed.) (1977) Citizen Participation Certification for
Community Development. Washington, D.C.: National Association of
Housing and Redevelopment Officials
United States Dept. of Transportation (1976) Effective Citizen
Participation in Transportation Planning. (Vol. II). Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Transportation.
yo 1880
SW-819
------- |