Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Social acceptance of the project
democratic society, there is always a duty to seek the fairest distribution of
advantages and disadvantages in time and space. The State, as guardian of the
public interest, bears ultimate responsibility for this. Its prerogatives naturally include
the arbitration needed to reach a final decision on location of projects and the
conditions to put in place in their regard.
The perception of risk
Project-related risk constitutes a major factor in the apprehensions and opposition
expressed by a majority living near the project. During the public hearings, it became
obvious that there was a major gap between the quantitative analyses of risk carried
out by the proponent and the perception of the same risk by many participants. While
the results of the analyses present the project’s inherent risk as negligible or
acceptable, a number of participants considered it unacceptable or intolerable.
This is neither a new nor unusual situation. For the past 30 years, polarization around
risks linked to industrial projects has accounted for some major social and community
cleavages in modern democratic societies. Such polarization is especially obvious
with projects perceived as high-risk, such as nuclear reactors and liquid natural gas
terminals. Thus, the Panel viewed exploring this aspect of the project as especially
relevant.
Apprehension of risk and its manifestations
It is noted and often mentioned that society is tolerant to highway fatalities. However,
if the number of accidental deaths over a single year was to occur in one place in one
fell swoop, this tolerance would be strikingly diminished or non-existent. Similarly,
society is less tolerant of accidental or intentional loss of life affecting a large number
of people with bonds between them, than when it happens to the same number of
people who are not linked in some way.
Some studies also point out that even when considerable loss of life is involved, the
same level of aversion does not occur for activities resulting from the exercise of free
will as for those where people are subjected to outside events, even when the latter
have fewer consequences. The same tendency is observed for familiar risks in
comparison to new risks 1 . Studies also show that natural disasters do not cause as
much indignation as accidents attributable to human activities.
1. M. Finucane, Improving quarantine risk communication: Understanding public risk perceptions, (report No. 00-7)
Decision Research: Eugene, Orégon, 2000, p. 31.
174 Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure