Risk Communication.

It is an “interactive exchange of information and opinions concerning risk among risk

assessors, risk managers, consumers and other interested parties”. Risk communication
has also been described as all those integrated processes and procedures: a) that involve
and inform all interested parties within the risk analysis process; b) that assist the
development of transparent and credible decision-making processes; and c) that can
instill confidence in risk management decisions ([Link] `

Risk communication often focuses on developing and conveying messages prior to and
during an event, and crisis communication focuses on doing so post-event. The
distinction allows for a specific focus and understanding of the types of information and
considerations that should be made at different stages and for different events.

Typically, risk communication involves a discussion about adverse outcomes, including

the probabilities of those outcomes occurring. In some instances, risk communication has
been used to help an individual make a decision in response to many questions, including
the following:

• Should I undergo a medical treatment?

• What are the risks of living next to a nuclear power plant?
• Do I elect to vaccinate a healthy baby against whooping cough?

In some cases, risk communication is used to help individuals adjust to something that
has already occurred, such as exposure to harmful carcinogens, possibly putting them at
greater risk for cancer. Risk communication would prepare people for that possibility. If
warranted, the communication would offer steps to take to lower their chance of dying
from cancer, such as screenings.

Goals of Risk Communication

The fundamental goal of risk communication is to provide meaningful, relevant and

accurate information, in clear and understandable terms targeted to a specific audience.
It may not resolve all differences between parties, but may lead to a better understanding
of those differences. It may also lead to more widely understood and accepted risk
management decisions. Effective risk communication should have goals that build and
maintain trust and confidence. It should facilitate a higher degree of consensus and
support by all interested parties for the risk management option(s) being proposed
([Link]

The Consultation considered that the goals of risk communication are to:
 • Promote awareness and understanding of the specific issues under consideration
during the risk analysis process, by all participants;
• Promote consistency and transparency in arriving at and implementing risk
management decisions;
• Provide a sound basis for understanding the risk management decisions proposed
or implemented;
• Improve the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the risk analysis process;
• Contribute to the development and delivery of effective information and
education programmes, when they are selected as risk management options;
• Foster public trust and confidence in the safety of the food supply;
• Strengthen the working relationships and mutual respect among all participants;
• Promote the appropriate involvement of all interested parties in the risk
communication process; and,
• Exchange information on the knowledge, attitudes, values, practices and
perceptions of interested parties concerning risks associated with food and related
topics.

Crisis Communication

The term “crisis communication” is generally used in two ways:

1. It describes the communication activities of an organization or agency facing a crisis.

They need to communicate about that crisis to their organization, various partners, and
the public.

Typically, a crisis:

• Occurs unexpectedly
• May not be in the organization’s control
• Requires an immediate response
• May cause harm to the organization’s reputation, image, or viability

As an example, the 1984 Bhopal gas leak in India19 was a crisis confronted by an
organization that faced blame for the situation. The company faced legal challenges and
negative public reactions for many years after the crisis. This organization faced some
legal or ethical responsibility for the crisis (unlike a disaster, where, for example, a
tornado does the damage). The public and many stakeholders judged the organization
based on their actions throughout the response.
2. The term “crisis communication” is associated more with emergency management and
the need to inform and alert the public about an event. In this case, crisis communication
might refer to the community leaders’ efforts to inform the public.

For example, leaders might need to evacuate a community in advance of a hurricane. In

this definition, the organization is not facing a threat to its reputation or image. The effort
to inform and warn the public is universally recognized as important. Many public alert
systems, like the old Emergency Broadcast System and the new Commercial Mobile Alert
System are based on this form of crisis communication.

The underlying thread in both forms of crisis communication is that an unexpected and
threatening event requires an immediate response. The content, form, and timing of the
communication can help reduce and contain the harm or make the situation worse. Crisis
may also imply lack of control by the involved organizations based on the timing of the
incident.

Disaster

The UNISDR (2009) defines a disaster as: “A serious disruption of the functioning of a
community or a society involving widespread human, material, or environmental losses
and impacts which exceeds the ability of the affected community to cope using only its
own resources.”

Some aspects of this definition need to be highlighted. Firstly, the emphasis of the
definition is on “a serious disruption”. One can therefore expect a disaster event to be
something which significantly changes the “normal”. It is an event which the majority of
the affected community will perceive as removing them from the “normal”.

Second and most important is the distinction which the definition places on abnormal
events and an event which we can classify as being a disaster. If the event “exceeds the
ability” of the affected community to handle the consequences by making use of all their
resources, then the event can be classified as “a disaster”. Lastly, note should be taken of
the concept “community”. Various disciplines define “community” quite differently. A
community is a collection of people sharing common interests and values. Despite being
culturally diverse, mobile or unstable, members of a community communicate with or on
behalf of each other in order to achieve a mutually beneficial outcome – they are bound
together by a common goal, their sense of belonging and a sense of place.

Risk and Disaster Risk

Risk has various connotations within different disciplines. In general risk is defined as
“the combination of the probability of an event and its negative consequences” (UNISDR,
2009). The term risk is thus multidisciplinary and is used in a variety of contexts. Risk is
usually associated with the degree to which humans cannot cope (lack of capacity) with
a particular situation (e.g. natural hazard).

The term disaster risk therefore refers to the potential (not actual and realized) disaster
losses, in lives, health status, livelihoods, assets and services, which could occur in a
particular community or society over some specified future time period. Disaster risk is
the product of the possible damage caused by a hazard due to the vulnerability within a
community. It should be noted that the effect of a hazard (of a particular magnitude)
would affect communities differently (Von Kotze, 1999:35). This is true because of the
level of the coping mechanisms within that particular community. Poorer communities
are therefore more at risk than communities that do have the capacity to cope.

Hazard

A hazard is defined as “a dangerous phenomenon, substance, human activity or

condition that may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property damage,
loss of livelihoods and services, social and economic disruption, or environmental
damage” (UNISDR, 2009).

Hazards can be single, sequential or combined in their origin and effects. Each hazard is
characterized by its location, intensity, probability and likely frequency. Typical
examples of hazards can be the absence of rain (leading to drought) or the abundance
thereof (leading to flooding). Chemical manufacturing plants near settlements can also
be regarded as hazardous; similarly, incorrect agricultural techniques will in the long run
lead to possible disasters. Hazards can either be a creation of humans (anthropogenic) or
the environment (natural). Although the former can more easily be planned for than the
latter, in both cases the management of the hazard will remain the same. Our
development efforts and attention should therefore be focused on the presence of various
hazards and this must inform our planning.

A distinction should also be made between normal natural occurrences and natural
hazards. Natural phenomena are extreme climatological (weather), hydrological (water),
or geological (earth) processes that do not pose any threat to persons or property. A
massive earthquake in an unpopulated area (e.g. the Sahara desert) is a natural
phenomenon. Once the consequences (a possible hazardous situation) of this natural
phenomenon come into contact with human beings it becomes a natural hazard. If this
natural hazard (due to the unplanned or poorly planned activities of the human beings),
affects them so that they are unable to cope, the situation becomes a disaster.
Difference between a Hazard and a Disaster

“Strictly speaking there are no such things as natural disasters, but there are natural
hazards. A disaster is the result of a hazard’s impact on society. So, the effects of a disaster
are determined by the extent of a community’s vulnerability to the hazard (conversely, its
ability, or capacity to cope with it). This vulnerability is not natural, but the result of an
entire range of constantly changing physical, social, economic, cultural, political and even
psychological factors that shape people’s lives and create the environments in which they
live.” Twigg (2001:6).

Vulnerability

Vulnerability is defined as the characteristics and circumstances of a community, system

or asset that make it susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard. Vulnerability is a set
of prevailing or consequential conditions arising from various physical, social, economic
and environmental factors which increase the susceptibility of a community to the impact
of hazards (UNISDR, 2002:24). It can also comprise physical, socio-economic and/or
political factors that adversely affect the ability of communities to respond to events
(Jegillos, 1999). Blaikie et al. (1994) are of the opinion that vulnerability is constituted by
the characteristics of a person or group in terms of their capacity to anticipate, cope with,
resist and recover from the impact of a hazard. Vulnerability can be expressed as the
degree of loss resulting from a potentially damaging phenomenon or hazard. It is
therefore the extent to which a community will degrade when subjected to a specified set
of hazardous conditions.

Vulnerability has some distinct underlying causes. The magnitude of each disaster,
measured in deaths, damage, or costs (for a given developing country) increases with the
increased marginalization of the population. This can be caused by a high birth rate,
problems of land tenure and economic opportunity, and the misallocation of resources to
meet the basic human needs of an expanding population. As the population increases,
the best land in both rural and urban areas is taken up, and those seeking land for farming
or housing are forced to accept inadequate land. This offers less productivity and a
smaller measure of physical or economic safety, thus rendering the community
vulnerable.

Coping Capacity

Coping capacity for disaster risk reduction refers to the ability of people, organizations
and systems, using available skills and resources, to face and manage adverse conditions
such as hazards, emergencies or disasters. Coping capacities contribute to the reduction
of disaster risks (UNISDR, 2009).
The focus here should therefore not only be on the individual or the community but also
the capacity of the supporting mechanisms to the individual and the community at large.
For example, one specific community might consist of a number of new immigrants but
this new community might enjoy the support of the local municipality. In themselves the
new community might not have cohesion yet, but their capacity lies in the support which
they have.

Similarly, an impoverished community might not be the focus of development, but

inherent in their internal social and economic structures they might possess significant
coping capacity and resilience. Coping capacity is therefore just as much about what a
community internally possesses, as the external structures on which they depend.

Resilience

In the natural environment, resilience means that an area or eco-system under threat is
restored to its original pristine state. In the construction and engineering industry,
resilience would be the ability of metal or a structure to return to an original state – being
able to withstand shock, weight or pressure. However, human systems cannot be
untouched by life events – they do not necessarily return to an original or former state
and the challenge is to continuously develop, improve and refine existing structures,
systems and environments in order to progress. Returning to an original or previous state
therefore corresponds with the tendency of certain communities to return to vulnerable
locations and rebuild their houses, without improving conditions and increasing chances
to progress. Resilience, however, implicitly requires improvement.

The UNISDR defines resilience as “the ability of a system, community or society exposed
to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in
a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its
essential basic structures and functions” (UNISDR, 2009). This definition therefore
considers the presence of a hazard and not a disaster. Thus, once a disaster actually
occurs, it would be incorrect to refer to resilience but rather to coping capacity. Resilience
and the building of resilience should therefore be seen as an integral part of disaster risk
reduction activities.

Resilience therefore means the ability to “spring back from” a shock. The resilience of a
community in respect of potential hazard events is determined by the degree to which
the community has the necessary resources and is capable of organizing itself both prior
to and during times of need (UNISDR, 2009).
Emergency and Disaster Management

This involves: “The organization and management of resources and responsibilities for
addressing all aspects of emergencies, in particular preparedness, response and initial
recovery steps. An emergency is a threatening condition which requires urgent action.
Effective emergency action can avoid the escalation of an event into a disaster. It involves
plans and institutional arrangements to engage and guide the efforts of government, non-
government, voluntary and private agencies in comprehensive and coordinated ways to
respond to the entire spectrum of emergency need” (UNISDR, 2009). The expression
“disaster management” is sometimes used instead of emergency management.

Disaster Risk Reduction

Disaster risk reduction (also referred to as just disaster reduction) is defined as the
concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and
manage the causal factors of disasters, including through reduced exposure to hazards,
lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the
environment, and improved preparedness for adverse effects. Disaster reduction
strategies include, primarily, vulnerability and risk assessment, as well as a number of
institutional capacities and operational abilities. The assessment of the vulnerability of
critical facilities, social and economic infrastructure, the use of effective early warning
systems, and the application of many different types of scientific, technical, and other
skilled abilities are essential features of disaster risk reduction.

Disaster Risk Management

Disaster risk management is the systematic process of using administrative directives,

organizations, and operational skills and capacities to implement strategies, polices and
improved coping capacities in order to lessen the adverse impacts of hazards and their
possibility of disaster. Disaster risk management aims to avoid, lessen or transfer the
adverse effects of hazards through activities and measures for prevention, mitigation and
preparedness (UNISDR, 2009).

The interaction between disaster risk reduction and disaster risk management is clear.
Disaster risk reduction concerns activities more focused on a strategic level of
management, whereas disaster risk management is the tactical and operational
implementation of disaster risk reduction.