Regulating Contested Local Hazards

Is Constructive Dialogue Possible Among Participants in Community Risk Management

Bibliographic Data

ID6329434
AuthorsAngela C Halfacre (University of Charleston), Albert R Matheny (University of Florida), Walter A Rosenbaum (University of Florida)
Year2000
Volume28
Issue3
Pages648-667
Publication date2000-08-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolicy Studies Journal (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0190-292X • E-ISSN: 1541-0072
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/j.1541-0072.2000.tb02053.x
OpenAlexW2042468676
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited5

This article uses focus group data to explore the connection between scientific uncertainty about environmental risks and the emergence of distrust among local populations, regulators, and technical experts affected by those risks. With data from a nationwide study of issues associated with the cleanup of U.S. nuclear weapons facilities, the article uses “dialogue theory” and focus group data from three locations to identify the sources of miscommunication and distrust among these actors. The authors conclude that, despite problems with perception and communication among these groups, enough common ground exists to be optimistic about expanding participation for all affected groups in the policymaking process. In fact, expanded participation should diminish the distrust developed from previous regulatory regimes

Business · Common ground · Constructive · Distrust · Focus (optics · Focus group · Perception · Political science · Process (computing · Public relations · Risk management · Computer Science · Disaster Management and Resilience · Environmental Justice and Health Disparities · Law · Psychology · Risk Perception and Management · Social Psychology · Marketing