Abstracts (PDF file, 1.8MB) - Society for Risk Analysis

SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
M4-F.2 Jardine, CG*; Driedger, SM; UNIVERSITY OF
ALBERTA; cindy.jardine@ualberta.ca
Communicating Environmental Health Risk Uncertainty:
A Systematic Review of the Literature
Communicating the uncertainty associated with environmental
health risks is a continuing challenge within risk
communication theory and practice. A systematic review of
quantitative and qualitative empirical research published
between 1985 and 2008 was conducted to consolidate and
integrate the knowledge currently available in this area. The
review involved searching more than 30 databases,
representing various health-related and communication
disciplines, using multiple combinations of keywords and
synonyms. In addition, a search was made of key journals (such
as Risk Analysis and Journal of Risk Research) and 109 key risk
communication authors. Of the initial 29,499 potential articles
identified, 28 met the inclusion criteria (22 of which were
empirical evaluations conducted since the year 2000). Lessons
learned for best practice include: (1) the importance of
describing the nature, source, and consequences of the
uncertainty; (2) the need to avoid vague or ambiguous
descriptions of uncertainty; (3) the influence of different risk
communication formats on understanding and uptake of
uncertainty information; (4) the importance of the
spokesperson; (5) how to work with the media to avoid
inaccurate information being put ‘into the information void’;
and (6) the critical importance of communicating risk
uncertainty at the beginning of a developing risk issue. Notable
gaps in the literature include the lack of research on different
cultural understandings of uncertainty and the impact of new
channels and sources of information (such as social media) on
communicating uncertainty. The findings from this review will
provide insights on needs for risk communication research in
this area that will help guide new paths forward.
T4-G.4 Jenkins, F*; Rowan, KE; George Mason University;
jenkins.fred@epa.gov
Ecological risk communication and environmental values:
Predicting public interest in participating in federal
rulemaking concerning pesticide risk
Two impediments to public participation in regulatory decision
making regarding ecological risks may be complex findings and
frequent failure to make ecological risk relevant to the public’s
concerns. Consequently, this study used the mental models
approach to risk communication to develop pesticide ecological
risk assessment materials accessible to lay audiences. Thirty-six
university students were interviewed to determine their
understanding of a pesticide’s risk to non-target plants and
animals. Their understanding was compared to scientific
characterizations of this hazard. Results showed participants
were not familiar with 21 of 29 elements found in
characterizations of pesticide ecological risk from scientific
literature. These results were used to design an account of
pesticide effects accessible to lay audiences. Participants (180)
were randomly assigned to a treatment or control conditions
and asked to complete an environmental attitudes survey.
Those in the treatment condition received a more accessible
account of a pesticide’s ecological risk than did those in the
control group. Results showed those who endorsed
pro-environmental attitudes were likely to be interested in
participating in a hypothetical US EPA rule-making effort
concerning a pesticide’s ecological risks. This association was
significant at the .05 level; however, there was no association
between condition assignment and interest in participating in
US EPA rule making. This set of findings suggests that
environmental values guide interest in participating in
environmental rule-making but leaves open the question of
whether knowledge about ecological pesticide risk is associated
with interest among stakeholders in participating in rule
making about ecological risk. The authors discuss factors that
may affect lay interest in managing ecological risks, especially
hazards apt to have implications for plants and animals near
dwellings.
T3-E.4 Jensen , E; Bellin, C; Embry, M*; Gaborek, B; Lander, D;
Tanir, JY; Wolf, D; Zaleski, R; Dow Corning Corporation ;
membry@hesiglobal.org
Water Chemicals Case Study Using the RISK21 Tiered
Exposure Framework
As part of the approach for advancing risk assessment in the
21st century, the HESI RISK21 project considered a case study
focused on health risk assessment for chemicals that may be
found in surface water, and therefore raise the potential for
human exposure. The problem was formulated such that a risk
manager would have ONE year to decide whether risk
management is required for any or all chemicals on a large list
of potential drinking water contaminants. For simplicity, the
only route of exposure considered was via consumption of
drinking water. This case study highlighted rapid screening
methods for risk prioritization, identifying readily available
sources of suitable data for use in risk assessment, and
challenges in considering cumulative exposure assessment. The
RISK21 case study participants identified key questions to
address and parameters to inform the assessment, and
described assessment results progressing through the tiers
with increasing levels of complexity. Another important output
was a graphical presentation of exposure and hazard that could
be useful in communicating risk to decision makers.
M2-A.4 Jessup, A*; Sertkaya, A; Morgan, K; Department of
Health and Human Services/OASPE; amber.jessup@hhs.gov
A novel approach to attributing illness to food using
consumption data and expert elicitation
Policy analysts are often asked to answer questions where there
are no published studies or published studies are only
peripherally related to the policy question. Often, the policy
questions are complex and data needed to provide a useful
answer are limited, conflicting, unavailable, or (as is sometimes
the case) unobtainable. Further, seldom are analysts given
large budgets in time or money to find answers. Meta-analysis
and systematic reviews are methods to combine results from a
body of established studies. Expert elicitation synthesizes
expert opinions when data are lacking, but is typically limited to
characterizing uncertainty around generally accepted
parameters. Where data and studies are completely lacking,
however, innovative methods must be applied. Information
linking foodborne illness (FBI) cases to the source of the illness
and/or specific food vehicle with sufficient specificity to guide
policy is one such area. Previous food attribution research has
used microbiological approaches (e.g., microbial sub-typing),
epidemiological approaches (e.g., the analysis of outbreak and
other surveillance data), and expert elicitation approaches
(Pires et al., 2009). None of these studies, however, appear to
have produced sufficiently detailed information to produce
groupings of foods that are homogenous with respect to risk.
We examine the challenges of answering scientific questions
needed for policy analysis, moving beyond characterizing
uncertainty. First, we discuss the applicability of different
research methods (i.e., expert elicitation [EE], meta-analysis,
and systematic reviews to the objective of generating FBI
attribution rates by highly disaggregated food categories. Next,
we develop and apply a hybrid novel method combining EE and
food consumption data to estimate FBI cases by highly
disaggregated food categories.
December 8-11, 2013 - Baltimore, MD