Best Practices for Risk Communication

Part of the Food Microbiology and Food Safety book series (FMFS)

It doesn't work to leap a twenty-foot chasm in two ten-foot jumps.(American Proverb)

In  Chapter 1, we reviewed the major issues in risk communication and outlined a view of the public communication process that often accompanies discussions of risks. Often, these discussions digress into arguments over entrenched positions with little hope of achieving consensus about what is an acceptable risk. Trust is undermined, the public does not have access to information, and antagonistic relationships ensue. We suggested that even in these cases, there is an opportunity to approach risk communication by recognizing that positions can converge and a middle ground in discussions of risk can be created. We view this convergence as an opportunity for dialogue leading to a more effective form of risk communication.

Another aspect to this convergence approach involves grounding activities in best practices.1The best practices method has been used widely in organizational and professional settings...


Risk Communication Policy Position Radio Frequency Identification Device Unknown Unknown Adaptive Element 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ahmed, P. K., & Rafiq, M. (1998). Integrated benchmarking: A holistic examination of select techniques for benchmarking analysis. Benchmarking for Quality Management and Technology, 5(3), 225–242.Google Scholar
  2. Berlo, D. K. (1977). Communication as process: Review and commentary. In B. D. Ruben (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 1(pp. 11–27). New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction.Google Scholar
  3. Berger, P. L., & Luckman, T. H. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  4. Cohen, M. D., & Sproull, L. S. (1996). Organizational learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Conrow, E. H. (2003). Effective risk management. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics.Google Scholar
  6. Covello, V. T., & Johnson, B. B. (1987). The social and cultural construction of risk. Boston, MA: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  7. Dozier, D. M., & Broom, G. M. (1995). Evolution of the managerial role in public relations practice. Journal of Public Relations Research, 7(1), 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Drabek, T. E., & McEntire, D. A. (2002). Emergent phenomena and multiorganizational coordination in disasters: Lessons from the research literature. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 20, 197–224.Google Scholar
  9. Gilchrist, J. A., & Browning, L. D. (1981). A grounded theory model for developing communication instruction. Communication Education, 30(3), 273–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, J. (2003). Risk communication and foodborne illness: Message sponsorship and attempts to stimulate perceptions of risk. Risk Analysis, 23(6), 1287–1296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heath, R. L., Seshadri, S., & Lee, J. (1998). Risk communication: A two-community analysis of proximity, dread, trust, involvement, uncertainty, openness/accessibility, and knowledge on support/opposition toward chemical companies. Journal of Public Relations Research, 10, 35– 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kasperson, R. E. (1991). Communicating risks to the public. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  14. Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., & Ratick, S. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis, 8(2), 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kyro, P. (2004). Benchmarking as an action research process. Benchmarking, 11(1), 52–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leiss, W. (2001). In the chamber of risks: Understanding risk communication. Toronto: McGill-Queen's Press.Google Scholar
  17. Littlefield, R., Cowden, K., Farah, F. McDonald, L. R., & Sellnow, T. (2006). Ten tips for risk and crisis communicators when working and conducting research with Native and New Americans. Fargo, ND: Institute for Regional Studies.Google Scholar
  18. Morgan, M. G., Fischoff, B., Bostrom, A., & Atman, C. (2001). Risk communication: The mental models approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Nicotera, A. M. (1983). Beyond two dimensions: A grounded theory model of conflict-handling behavior. Management Communication Quarterly, 6(3), 282–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Reynolds, B., & Seeger, M. W. (2005). Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model. Journal of Health Communication Research, 10(1), 43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Seeger, M. W. (1996). Ethics and organizational communication. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  22. Seeger, M. W. (2006). Best practices in crisis communication: An expert panel process. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34(3), 232–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Slovic, P., Fischoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1982). Facts versus fears: Understanding perceived risk.In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment underuncertainty: Heuristics and biases(pp. 463–489). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Veil, S. R. (2006). Crisis communication and agrosecurity: Organizational learning in a high-risk environment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Dakota State University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Personalised recommendations