Download Grosche_ANSES-CSO 7

The role of social sciences
within the BfS:
risk communication and
empirical research
Dr. Bernd Grosche
Head WG Radiation Risk and Radiation Protection
Concepts incl. Risk Communication
Ph.D. in Epidemiology, M.Sc. in Sociology
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
The Federal Office for Radiation
Protection (BfS)
•
•
•
•
BfS works for the safety and protection of man and
the environment against damages due to ionising and
non-ionising radiation.
In the field of ionising radiation there are, e. g., X-ray
diagnostics in medicine, safety in the handling of
radioactive substances in nuclear technology and the
protection against enhanced natural radioactivity.
The work in the field of non-ionising radiation includes
the protection against ultraviolet radiation and the
effects of mobile communication.
Of special importance are, in addition to the defence
against immediate hazards, the precautions for the
protection of the general public, persons employed in
the working world as well as patients in the medical
field.
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
BfS – Simplified Organigramme
The President
Press
Information
Central
Department
incl. PR
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Nuclear
Safety
Safety of
Nuclear Waste
Management
Rad. Prot.
and Health
Rad. Prot.
and the
Environment
BfS Workforce
• Some 800 employees
• Social scientists
– Press information
– Public relations
– Dep. Radiation Protection
and Health
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Dep.Radiation Protection and
Health
• Division Effects and Risks of Ionising and NonIonising Radiation
– WG Biological Radiation Effects, Biological Dosimetry
– WG Non-Ionising Radiation, Dosimetry, Operation of UV
Measuring Network
– WG Radiation Epidemiology
– WG Radiation Risk and Radiation Protection
Concepts incl. Risk Communication (4 sociologists)
• Division Medical and Occupational Radiation
Protection (1 sociologist)
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
„History of sociology“ in BfS
• 1981: Health reporting including social indicators for districts
• Validity of patients‘ information on past X-ray examinations
• Birth outcome in Germany following the Chernobyl accident
(cohort studies)
• Gap
• Increased awareness of the importance of risk and (more
recently) crisis communication incl. stakeholder involvement
– Childhood leukaemia near NPPs
– Mobile phone use
– Nuclear waste disposal
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Risk Communication and Public Relations /
Press Information
Risk
Communication
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
8
PR / Press
Information
A few words on radiation
• Ionizing radiation
• Non-ionizing radiation
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Risks from radiation exposure
(relevant for this presentation)
• Radon: ~ 1,900 lung cancer deaths per year in
Germany
• Nearness of a NPP: 1 extra case of leukaemia
amongst 0-4 years old per year in Germany (no
plausible explanation) [dose too low by at least a
factor of 1,000 and well below dose limits]
• 50 Hz fields: increased risk of childhood leukaemia
above 0.3 µT (no explanation at all) [dose limit 100
µT]
• Mobil phone use: no known risks to date
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
WG Radiation Risk and Radiation Protection
Concepts incl. Risk Communication
• Evaluation of Radiation Risks – Ionizing and
Non-Ionizing
• Further Development of Radiation Protection
Concepts
• Risk Communication
– Work on scientific basis
– Direct communication in special situations
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Topics of risk communication
• Ionizing radiation
– Vicinity of NPPs
– Radon in homes (radon
awareness survey)
– Nuclear waste disposals
(participation)
– Nuclear accidents (Chernobyl,
Fukushima)
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Topics of risk communication
• Non-ionizing radiation
– UV (action plan, education
material)
– Mobile phone use (education
material)
– 50 Hz fields (education
material)
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Empirical research I: risk perception
• Radon (radon wareness survey, from knowledge to action)
• Mobile phone use
–
–
–
–
–
–
Perecption of risk
Target group analysis
Information transfer
Conflict settlement
Knowledge transfer
Round table (stakeholder involvement)
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Radon awarness surveys
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Central Observations from the
RAS
•
•
•
•
•
Risk communication raises the information level and helps to change
behaviour.
In general the facts about radon have to be continuously communicated
and efforts have to be made to put radon in the “right place”, as e.g. radon is
seen as a “rural” problem.
The public may know about the severe health effects from radon, but this risk
in comparison with other risks is underestimated; Future risk
communication strategies could focus on this aspect.
Possible measures to reduce radon must be adapted to the local
circumstances, as it seems that the public in some countries (e.g. in
Germany) would rather pay a higher amount for remediation work by experts
and in other countries (e.g. in the Czech Republic) they rely more on friends
and their own work.
A Stakeholder approach should focus on medical doctors, pharmacists,
home inspectors and architects.
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Empirical research II: evaluation
• Information campaigns
• education material
• information material
• BfS statements perceived
by the public
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Risk communication in various fields of
radiation protection
• State of the art on „societal aspects“
• Risk perception
• Risk behaviour
• Public information needs
• Information needs as seen by BfS
• Intervention ?
• Stakeholder involvement (their interests, arguments etc.)
• media, persons concerned, scientists, physicians, industry, politics, statutory
accident insurance and prevention, …)
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
18
Handbook on Risk Communication
Handbuch des BfS zur Risikokommunikation
Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen
BfS-spezifische Handlungsfelder
Erkenntnisse zum BfS-internen Umgang mit
Risikokommunikation
For internal use only
1
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Contents
• Introduction
• Basics in risk communication
• Risk perception and behaviour, cognition, and health
behaviour
• Central aspects of risk communication
• The roles of BfS
• The role of trust in risk communication
• On the use of risk comparisons in risk communication
• Communication of scientific uncertainties
• Analyses on specific topics
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Specific topics
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Radon
Radon spas
Childhood leukaemia and NPPs
HF electro-magnetic fields
LF electric and magnetic fields
Electro sensibility
UV radiation and skin cancer
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Handbook Structure I
• Scientific evidence
– Exposure, diseases, exposure-disease relationship
• Uncertainties
• Dissent among scientists
– On what ?
– Arena (scientists, public)
– BfS‘ position
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Handbook Structure II
• Recommendation on actions and behaviour
– By exposure originator
– To the user
– Other concerned persons (w/o any benefit)
• Risk perception and behaviour
– What happens after inadequate behaviour?
– Do we know enought about risk perception?
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Handbook Structure III
• Scientific framework / basic conditions
– Significance of the source of exposure in daily life
– Who are the most important stakeholders?
– What are their points of view?
– Which aspects shape the risk discourse?
• What are the most urgent action needs?
• What is BfS doing?
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Future topics for the Handbook
• in progress
– Nuclear waste disposals (in general, Asse, Konrad, Morsleben
(ERAM), Gorleben),
– Exposures at the workplace
• planned:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Medical radition exposure
Natural radiation exposure (other than radon)
Transportation of radioactive substances
Mammography
Radioactivity in drinking water
NORM (Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials)
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Current work
• Behaviour model
• Combination of aspects from behavioural
sciences (e.g. sociology and pychology) and
environmental economy
• Aiming at practical use / orientation for planning
of information campaigns, intervention etc.
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
26
Thoughts on risk communication and
nuclear waste disposals
• Basic concepts of radiation protection
– Dose constraints
– Optimization
– Justification
• Not only radiation protection, but also societal,
economic and other aspects
• Most challenging part of radiation protection, in
particular after disasters and when planning nuclear
waste disposals
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Showcase DMF
•
•
•
•
„hard science“ alone is not enough
self commitment by the providers
here, communication is of central importance
personell hired for this topic
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
German Mobile Telecommunication
Research Programme (DMF)
• The DMF was conducted from 2002 to 2007 within the
portfolio of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) under the auspices
of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS).
• The Programme was funded with €17 million, equally shared
by the Federal Ministry for the Environment and the network
operators.
• The Programme supported the WHO’s international EMF
project and seeked to increase the amount of data required
for risk assessment.
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
German Mobile Telecommunication
Research Programme (DMF)
• Research focused on:
– Biological mechanisms of action of high
frequency fields
– effects on animals and humans
– determination of the exposure, i.e. dosimetry
– risk communication
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
German Mobile Telecommunication
Research Programme (DMF)
• BfS has determined the scope of knowledge still needed in
order to reevaluate the health risks
• On this basis, BfS has drawn up a draft of a research
programme.
• The BfS draft was submitted to a comprehensive
consultation process, e.g. public consultation on the internet
and a final public discussion in an expert workshop
• The resulting comments were taken into account for the
development of the final programme draft
• After conclusion of the projects in 2007, public meetings took
place in order to allow a final discussion of the results.
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Transparency
• BfS has made available to the public an internet portal for
the Research Programme (www.emfforschungsprogramm.de).
• The BfS internet portal comprises:
– Description of the entire Programme.
– Overview of the research projects within the framework of the
Programme (topic, summary description, term (each item in English
and German), interim reports in their current version (Programme
report), and, on conclusion of the projects, final reports (in German)
and abstracts in English and German.
– Overview of the results of national and international research projects
on the relevant areas of research, including BfS assessments.
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
RTDMF
• Representatives from the following institutions take part in
the RTDMF:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
German Commission on Radiation Safety (SSK),
Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz (BUND),
Telecommuniction network providers,
Mobile Telecommunication Information Centre (IZMF),
consumer centres,
German Medical Association,
Länderausschuss für Immissionsschutz,
Research Association for Radio Applications,
Office of Technology Assessment at the German Parliament (TAB),
one media representative
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Projects on risk communication
within DMF I
Risk perception EMF
• Identifying the general public's fears and anxieties
with regard to the possible risks of high frequency
electromagnetic fields of mobile
telecommunications (annual surveys since 2003)
• Analysis of target groups for differentiated
information
• A socio-psychological analysis of the characteristics
and needs for information and communication of
electromagnetic hypersensitive persons
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Projects on risk communication
within DMF II
Information and communication measures
• Examination of the knowledge and effects of
information activities in the field of mobile
telecommunications and determination of further
approaches to improve information of different
population groups
• EMF-Portal: Internet Information System and
Literature Database on Biomedical Effects of
Electromagnetic Fields
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Projects on risk communication
within DMF III
Site acquisition in Germany - Risk communication in local
settings
• Site acquisition process in Germany – Framework,
Regulation, Practice
• Realisation of the self commitment
• Support of the co-operation between the mobile
telecommunication actors by the local Agenda 21
• Development of an online manual for successful siting
processes and risk communication in the field of mobile
phone conflicts
• Mediation as a possible alternative dispute resolution
method in the site acquisition process
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Risk perception
• (bi-)annual surveys on risk perception:
• Identifying the general public's fears and
anxieties with regard to the possible risks of
high frequency electromagnetic fields of
mobile telecommunications, 2003-2006, 2009
(next one on its way)
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Risk perception
• The surveys were focused on possible health
concerns and perceived health problems of
the population in relation to high frequency
electromagnetic fields from mobile phones. In
addition, various data concerning cell phone
use, level of information, as well as
knowledge and application of preventive
measures were collected.
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Risk perception
• In general EMF related risks are of lower
priority compared with other possible health
risks.
• So EMF is ranked lower then consumption of
meat of unknown origin, gene technology, air
pollution, side effects from medicine, UV
radiation, cigarette smoking and alcohol
consumption.
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Information for public servants
• „Best practice“ portal for
people working in
communities etc. and
who are involved in
deciding were to build
new or modified antennas
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Information on radiation protection and
their public perception
• What kind of information is available ?
• Review of social science literature
• Who gives this information ?
• Internet review
• Public perception and understanding ?
• Representative survey, 2,512 CATI
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Information on radiation protection
and their public perception
Results
• NPP are most dangerous
• UV risk is known, but not as dangerous as NPPs
• Less harmful: braodcasting (radio and TV), mobile phone
use, radon
Information given by BfS is thought to be
• trust worthy:
~ 85 %
• competent:
~ 90 %
• frank and honest: ~ 65 %
Knowledge about BfS information on grid development < 5%
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Further projects
1. Knowledge management
2. annual surveys
3. study evaluation system for lay persons
4. Best-Practice-Portal
5. Evaluation of the EMF portal
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013
Special thanks to Christiane Pölzl-Viol
and Conny Egblomassé-Roidl
Thank you very much or your attention!
B. Grosche, ANSES, 01/2013