OECD overview of on-going and future HLRF projects. Discussion lead on risk communication policies and practices across countries.

1. RISK COMMUNICATION POLICIES AND
PRACTICES –
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ACROSS OECD COUNTRIES
OECD High Level Risk Forum
Public Governance and Territorial Development Directorate
Catherine Gamper
10 December 2015, Loy Conference Centre
Washington, D.C.

2. Risk Communication
“Risk Communication is the exchange of
information with the goal of maintaining or
improving risk understanding, affecting risk
perception and/or equipping people or groups to
act appropriately in response to an identified
risk”(US DHS, 2008)

3. 1. Risk awareness could be higher:
– Loire river basin, France: 53% of CEO‘s with businesses located in flood zones unaware
of risks
– Low levels of awareness = low levels of resilience, i.e. maintaining function in case of a
disruption
2. Ineffective risk communication → under- or over-estimating risks
→ sub-optimal allocation, i.e. under- or over-provision of
protection against risks
3. Countries deem many risk communication measures ineffective,
yet continue applying them for lack of alternatives
Why is it important to address risk
communication?
There is value and opportunity for identifying novel risk
communication practices across countries and testing potential for
policy transfer!

4. Risk communication survey

5. RESULTS

6. Responsibilities for communicating about
risks
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Numberofrespondingcountries
Actors with formal responsibility for risk communication
However, other stakeholders can be
more systematically included in the
communication process

7. • A comprehensive all-hazards, transboundary
approach enhances national resilience and
responsiveness:
– Only half of responding countries have an all-hazards
approach
– Almost all respondent countries integrate notions of
trans-boundary risks
– Countries tend to communicate about risks in silos
• They utilise administrative department lines rather than
viewing issues horizontally
Fostering a comprehensive approach
GOOD PRACTICE highlight: Greece’s General Secretariat
for Civil Protection

8. Risk communication strategies are not as
forward-looking as they could be
• 58% of countries communicate about known
risks only
• 42% of countries integrate notions of complex ,
unknonw risks in their risk communications
• GOOD PRACTICE highlight: Queensland’s
“Harden-Up” Initative.

9. Approaches to risk communication (cont.)
Yes
46%
No
18%
I don't
know
36%
Cascading effects conveyed in risk
communication
yes
67%
no
25%
don't
know
8%
Communicating about
uncertainty

10. Purpose of risk communication
0 1 2 3 4 5
Raise public awareness about hazards and risks
Encourage protective behaviour
Inform on how to behave during hazardous events
Enhance knowledge about risks through education and training
Warn of and trigger actions in response to imminent and…
Reassure the public, improve relationships (build trust,…
Enable mutual dialogue and understanding
Promote the acceptance of risk management measures
Involve actors in decision making
Average importance (low to high, 0-5)
Risk communication is still viewed in a traditional sense, to inform about
imminent threats and behavioural responses

11. Purpose of risk communication (cont.)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
NGO's Private sector academia/science citizens Neighbourhood
groups
Countryresponsefrequency
Types of major stakeholders involved in the communication process
Non-governmental stakeholders seem to be involved in many but
not all responding countries

12. Inclusive risk communication
TV ads
19%
Radio ads
18%
Newspaper ads
18%
Information campaigns
covering several
communication
channels
19%
Active use of political
leadership
14%
Civic code
4%
Internet (Websites,
social networks)
8%
Other
12%

13. Inclusive risk communication
Relationships between message providers and
message receivers based on two-way
communication are the foundation of an effective
risk communication:
• 75% of responding countries have established
platforms for government authorities to
engage with citizens in a two-way and
interactive communication about risks

14. • Grounding risk communication in scientific evidence
is key to ensure quality and accuracy in risk
communication:
– 75% of countries confirm that this is the case in their
country:
• It is important to directly assess the impact of
different communication activities so to ensure their
effectiveness through continuous long-run learning
– 60% of countries assess the impact of risk communication
activities, but scarcely report results
Quality assurance

15. 1. Integrate stakeholders more systematically and effectively
2. Favour a multi-hazards approach
3. Increase the importance of communicating about risk prevention
4. Risk communication needs to become more inclusive and
interactive
5. Grounding risk communication in scientific evidence is key to
ensure quality and accuracy in risk communication
6. Information communication technologies, including social media,
could be further exploited
Draft recommendations for improving risk
communication policies and practices

16. For further information please contact:
catherine.gamper@oecd.org