Communication strategy and risk perception

Not only that providing information about the risk is essential but also the way information is provided is just as important. The “neutral” framing of information is not necessarily the best way to present risk information to citizens. The information should be framed in a way to maximize citizens' wellbeing (Slovic et al., 2002). That means that the information about risk should have an affective code rendering it more salient and meaningful (Finucane & Holup, 2006). For example, some authors propose using different symbols to emphasize important information, using letter grades to mark safety data or adding affective descriptions alongside numbers (i.e. excellent, good; Finucane & Holup, 2006; Slovic et al., 2002). The main idea is to add an affective note to otherwise purely numerical information in order to address the citizens' experiential system.

Note: See source document for full reference.

Cultural Factors: Communication

Hazards: Natural hazards, Man-made non-intentional hazards or emergency situations, Man-made intentional hazards

Disaster Phases: Prevention

Types of Actors Concerned: Non-active citizens, Active citizens, Media, National civil protection body, Local authorities, Entrepreneurs, Government, National research bodies, Red Cross, NGOs, Military, Law enforcement agencies, Healthcare and emergency services, European Civil Protection Mechanism, UN and other international organisations, All types of actors

Recommendations:

• Inform citizens about the risk they may face and about possible actions and measures, they can take to reduce vulnerability and better prepare themselves
• Use cultural factors to improve the effectiveness of disaster communication