Burger J, Gochfeld M, Powers C W, Waishwell L, Warren C, Goldstein B D
Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, Institute, Rutgers University, PIscataway 08854-8082, USA.
Environ Manage. 2001 Apr;27(4):501-14. doi: 10.1007/s002670010166.
In recent years there has been a startling rise in the issuance of fish consumption advisories. Unfortunately, compliance by the public is often low. Low compliance can be due to a number of factors, including confusion over the meaning of advisories, conflicting advisories issued by different agencies, controversies involving health benefits versus the risks from consuming fish, and an unwillingness to act on the advisories because of personal beliefs. In some places, such as along the Savannah River, one state (South Carolina) had issued a consumption advisory while the other (Georgia) had not, although at present, both states now issue consumption advisories for the Savannah River. Herein we report on the development of a fish fact sheet to address the confusing and conflicting information available to the public about consuming fish from the Savannah River. The process involved interviewing fishers to ascertain fishing and consumption patterns, evaluating contaminant levels and exposure pathways, discussing common grounds for the provision of information, and consensus-building among different regulatory agencies (US Environmental Protection Agency, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Georgia Department of Natural Resources) and the Department of Energy. Consensus, a key ingredient in solving many different types of "commons" problems, was aided by an outside organization, the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP). The initial role for CRESP was to offer scientific data as a basis for groups with different assumptions about risks to reach agreement on a regulatory response action. The process was an example of how credible science can be used to implement management and policies and provide a basis for consensus-building on difficult risk communication issues. The paper provides several lessons for improving the risk process from stakeholder conflicts, through risk assessment, to risk management. It also suggests that consensus-building and risk communication are continuing processes that involve assimilation of new information on contaminants and food-chain processes, state and federal law, public policy, and public response.
近年来，鱼类消费建议的发布量急剧上升。不幸的是，公众的遵从度往往较低。遵从度低可能有多种因素，包括对建议含义的困惑、不同机构发布的相互冲突的建议、涉及食用鱼类的健康益处与风险的争议，以及由于个人信念而不愿根据建议采取行动。在一些地方，比如萨凡纳河沿岸，一个州（南卡罗来纳州）发布了消费建议，而另一个州（佐治亚州）却没有，不过目前两个州都针对萨凡纳河发布了消费建议。在此，我们报告一份鱼类情况说明书的编制情况，以解决公众在食用萨凡纳河鱼类方面所面临的令人困惑且相互冲突的信息问题。该过程包括采访渔民以确定捕鱼和消费模式、评估污染物水平和接触途径、讨论提供信息的共同基础，以及在不同监管机构（美国环境保护局、南卡罗来纳州卫生与环境控制部、佐治亚州自然资源部）和能源部之间达成共识。一个外部组织——利益相关者参与风险评估联盟（CRESP）协助达成了共识，而共识是解决许多不同类型“公共资源”问题的关键要素。CRESP的最初作用是提供科学数据，作为不同风险假设的群体就监管应对行动达成一致的基础。这个过程是一个范例，展示了可靠的科学如何用于实施管理和政策，并为在困难的风险沟通问题上达成共识提供依据。本文提供了一些经验教训，以改进从利益相关者冲突到风险评估再到风险管理的风险过程。它还表明，建立共识和风险沟通是持续的过程，涉及吸收有关污染物和食物链过程、州和联邦法律、公共政策以及公众反应的新信息。
