Frewer Lynn
Marketing and Consumer Behaviour Group, University of Wageningen, Building no. 201, Hollandseweg 1, Wageningen 6706 KN, The Netherlands.
Toxicol Lett. 2004 Apr 1;149(1-3):391-7. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2003.12.049.
Public perceptions of risk have often been dismissed on the basis of "irrationality", and have tended to be excluded from policy processes by risk assessors and managers. People's responses to different risks are determined by psychological factors. The technical risk estimates traditionally provided by experts do not influence people's behaviours and responses in the same way as their risk perceptions. Some concerns are very specific to particular hazard. It is also important to communicate the difference between probability and variability associated with risk estimates. Risk communication must take account of the actual concerns of the public (for example, potential for negative environmental impact, unintended human health effects, or vulnerable groups within the population). When the public want information about a risk, they prefer a clear message regarding risks and associated uncertainties, including the nature and extent of disagreements between different experts. Furthermore, societal priorities for risk mitigation activities may not align with those identified by expert groups. Dismissing the former as irrelevant may result increased distrust in the motives of regulators and industry, with consequences for public confidence in regulatory activities linked to public protection. Awareness and understanding of public concerns must be the basis of an effective risk management strategy.
公众对风险的认知常常因“非理性”而被忽视，并且往往被风险评估者和管理者排除在政策制定过程之外。人们对不同风险的反应由心理因素决定。专家传统上提供的技术风险估计对人们行为和反应的影响，与他们的风险认知不同。有些担忧非常针对特定的危害。传达与风险估计相关的概率和变异性之间的差异也很重要。风险沟通必须考虑公众的实际担忧（例如，对环境产生负面影响的可能性、意外的人类健康影响或人群中的弱势群体）。当公众想要了解风险信息时，他们更喜欢关于风险和相关不确定性的清晰信息，包括不同专家之间分歧的性质和程度。此外，社会对风险缓解活动的优先事项可能与专家组确定的优先事项不一致。将前者视为无关紧要可能会导致对监管机构和行业动机的不信任增加，从而影响公众对与公共保护相关的监管活动的信心。对公众担忧的认识和理解必须是有效风险管理策略的基础。
