There is a big contrast between the risks that exist and the risks perceived by the public.

The demonstration and announcement on the site selection of the MSW incineration power plant project in Haiyan County, Zhejiang Province has aroused public concern. Haiyan County leaders recently said in a news briefing that after research, Haiyan MSW incineration power plant project has been stopped. Next, in the construction of government projects, we should further improve and improve the more effective consultation mechanism and methods of "democracy for the people's livelihood" and communicate with the people through consultation.

In recent years, many of the proposed incineration plants, chemical and other projects, often because of public questions about environmental health risks and hastily dismounted. In this regard, experts said that the relevant institutions should fully understand how the public perceive the risk, in the process of communication, know how to respond to and guide public risk awareness, through good communication to resolve public anxiety.

Poor risk communication can exacerbate public perception of risk bias, fragmented information can also aggravate the public psychological burden.

At present, there are three main types of environmental health risks: first, sudden environmental accidents, such as dangerous chemicals production and storage, transportation process of fire, explosion and leakage. Two is a sudden accident caused by cumulative pollution under certain conditions. Third, long-term chronic environmental risks, such as haze, pollution sites, long-term accumulation of chemicals in the environment.

According to statistics, in recent years, the frequency of environmental pollution incidents in China has been declining, but the public thinks that the environmental health risks have become greater.

Bi Jun, Dean of the Environmental College of Nanjing University, said in an interview with the media that the first reason is that most people's perception of risk comes from unexpected incidents. The impact of some particularly serious pollution incidents is several times or even hundreds of times smaller. Although the probability of occurrence is small, it is generally unacceptable to the public. The consequences are particularly serious.

Two, risk communication is not well done. For example, there is a great contrast between the actual risk and the perceived risk of the public. No matter the government or scholars, they can not give a reasonable explanation at the appropriate time, which aggravates the deviation of public risk perception. In addition, the lack of public participation makes the public think that there are more unspeakable things hidden in it, resulting in a vicious circle.

Wang Ruotao, a researcher at the Chinese Centers for Disease Control, agrees that any risk event will stimulate public feelings. This emotional stimulation is called emotional response. Under strong emotional reactions, especially when information is incomplete, people's perception is problematic.

He cited two of the most common problems: one is that the public listens selectively and understands; the other is that once there is a strong emotional stimulus, the public tends to think negatively. For example, if air crashes occur continuously for a certain period of time, the public will have a strong feeling that flying is unsafe. In fact, it is not the case that people used to fly a lot, but the successive reports of air crashes in the media will give the public a natural emotional response that flying is unsafe.

Wang Ruotao said that for risk perception, people are different, experts, government, media, the public are different, the parties, people closely related to the general people are different. Risk in the eyes of experts is estimated by statistics, risk probability and mortality, is scientific data and probability, is the impact on the group; for ordinary people, risk is the severity of the impact on personal life, the possibility, is the psychological perception of space-time distance. Often not standing in the position of the group, always standing in their own position to consider problems, and often based on personal experience.

He emphasized that actual risks are quite different from those perceived by the public. Risk perception is different and reaction is different. This must be noted in the process of communication between environmental health risks.

Why is it that the public takes a revolutionary approach rather than sitting down calmly to communicate? In the eyes of experts, it is not that the public is irrational, but that it is based on what has been seen as the state of the industry. In 2012 and 2014, environmental groups applied for information disclosure from all waste incinerators nationwide, but both results showed a response rate of only about 30%.

Wang Ruotao said that the lack of information will cause a high degree of anxiety among the people concerned, and access to fragmented information will also increase people's psychological burden.

Effective risk communication must be illustrated by examples that are highly relevant and familiar to the listener, in plain, clear and understandable language

According to Wang Ruotao, in order to carry out the exchange of environmental and health risks, it is necessary to recognize the difference between the general public's perception of risks and the government and experts. Effective communication must be illustrated by examples that are highly relevant and familiar to the listener, and in a simple, clear and understandable language. When communicating at risk, try not to use negative language and talk about what you're doing, not what you're not doing.

He summed up three modes of communication on environmental health risks: information dissemination and dissemination, two-way communication and health education, and participatory decision-making and joint management.

Among them, information dissemination and dissemination, such as news release, this is the most common way of communication. As for two-way communication and health education, Wang Ruotao said that there is little dialogue between environmental protection departments, the media and relevant personnel, even if there is a lack of communication often enough planning, often emergency. After environmental health events, public attention was made after media coverage, and forced to speak.

For example, the waste incineration plant project did the EIA, the conclusion is what, if the EIA passed, why can pass. If there is a protest and how to deal with it, is there any plan? He believes that environmental health risk communication should be changed from passive information dissemination to active, planned two-way communication and health education.

The ultimate goal of environmental health risk communication is to enable stakeholders to reach a consensus. Wang Ruotao said that many western countries regard risk communication as participatory decision-making and co-management, and the greatest benefit of doing so is to share responsibility and form a consensus.

In addition, when conducting risk communication, we must also realize that our society is a network society and acquaintances coexist.

He said that the greatest feature of the network society is that the general public with the help of the network and public investigation, acting as a "citizen reporter" role, through forwarding, posting and other means of rapid dissemination of information, play a magnifying role. Moreover, the risk discourse of experts and government departments often encounters the deconstruction and subversion of "citizen journalism" of the general public.

In addition to the network society, there is also an acquaintance society, in a small circle, such as the community, we trust each other.

In addition, Wang Ruotao also stressed the role played by non-governmental environmental organizations in environmental health risk communication. He believes that the involvement of non-governmental environmental protection organizations is of positive significance in resolving disputes and reaching consensus, and avoiding irrational rights protection to harm the whole society.

Focal point

The key to effective communication is building trust.

Trust is the basis for good communication. Wang Ruotao, a researcher at the China Center for Disease Control and Prevention, believes that the key to risk communication is to build mutual trust.

Nowadays, the Internet has become an important channel for people to learn and disseminate information. Wang Ruotao said, it is interesting that people believe and doubt about Internet information. People are highly skeptical about network information, but they are willing to spread it.

"Where does the information that the public believe comes from? From the acquaintance society, it is the sense of trust." Wang Ruotao said that we must establish public trust in environmental protection departments and trust in environmental experts. The training of influential and trustworthy experts and speakers is crucial to effective communication.

To do this, he believes that experts and speakers must first be caring, compassionate and understanding, and highly confident and professional; secondly, show dedication and commitment to responsibility, can not shirk responsibility; thirdly, create a friendly atmosphere, maintain humility and build a sense of trust.

In order to win the public's trust, experts also suggest that a reasonable expectation should be established when communicating risks of environmental health emergencies. The public should be informed that the information and recommendations provided are based only on what is known and available, but that the characteristics of the illness provided with further understanding of the events should be identified. Information such as prevention and control measures will change.

In addition, government departments should actively communicate with the public about known and unknown situations, so that people know that government departments will inform them in time when new information is available, so that they can understand the decision-making and process of the government's response to the incident, and show an open attitude in describing the situation and responding to it, so as to meet the needs of the public. Public needs.