This book chapter discusses how risk communication should be used to improve public health. Segments of this chapter include: Risk Communication Defined, The Biology of Fear, Risk Perception Psychology, Recommendations, and Conclusions. 

During the Salmonella Typhimurium event of early 2009 and the associated recalls of numerous peanut butter and peanut-containing products, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) worked together to develop an integrated social media campaign.  The goal of the campaign was to provide consumers and partners with social media tools to access up-to-date information about the recalls. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are working together to provide consumers and partners with social media tools to access information about the ongoing peanut butter and peanut-containing product recalls. This page will be updated as new communication approaches are employed.

This book provides the reader practical advice on how to effectively manage and overcome a crisis as well as guidelines for taking the many challenges that crises present and turning those challenges into opportunities for overcoming a crisis. 

This book is a guide to effective risk communication. It established the relationship between risk, hazard, and outrage, and discusses all three in detail as related to a specific audience as the target of the risk communication message. 

This paper describes the role of risk perceptions in public health including sections on quantitative and qualitative assessments.

The section on quantitative assessment treats the most obvious question about laypeople's risk perceptions: Do they understand how big risks are? It begins with representative results regarding the quality of these judgments, along with some psychological theory regarding reasons for error. It continues with issues in survey design, which focus on how design choices can affect respondents' apparent competence. Some of these meth­odological issues reveal substantive aspects of lay risk perceptions. 

The next section, qualitative assessment, shifts the focus  from summary judgments  to  qualitative  features of the events to which they are attached.  It begins with the barriers to communication created when experts and laypeople unwittingly use terms differently. The section continues  by  asking  how  people believe  that  risks "work," on the  basis of which they might generate or evaluate control options.

In addition, there is a section that provides a general process for developing communications about health risks. This process is illustrated with examples taken from several case studies. 

An independent international review of New Zealand Food Safety Authority’s (NZFSA) approach to ensuring food safety for consumers has found it to be aligned with best practice in comparable authorities internationally.The release of Dr Stuart Slorach’s review of the organisation’s risk management framework and its application has been welcomed by NZFSA Chief Executive Dr Andrew McKenzie.

The researchers present two experiments investigating the role of emotions concerning technological and natural hazards and perceived risk. In the first experiment, emotions aroused by technological hazards and natural hazards were compared. The second experiment adopted real-world materials from webpages and TV. 

This article uses the case studies of variability in the risks of dying on the ground from a crashing airplane and from the deployment of motor vehicle airbags to demonstrate how better characterization of variability and uncertainty in the risk assessment lead to better risk communication. Analogies to food safety and environmental risks are also discussed. This presentation demonstrates that probabilistic risk assessment has an impact on both risk management and risk communication, and highlights remaining research issues associated with using improved sensitivity and uncertainty analyses in risk assessment.

Risk analysis continues to evolve. There is increasing depth and breadth to each component of the four-step risk-assessment paradigm of hazard identification, dose-response analysis, exposure assessment, and risk characterization. Basic conceptual approaches to understanding how people perceive risk are being tested against a growing body of empirical observations, many involving stakeholders. This article summarizes recent advances in risk analysis. 

This paper addresses the importance of key elements in crisis planning, crisis preparedness and crisis management, which are summarized in key recommendations for effective risk communication during food incidents for all key stakeholders. To achieve safety of food from farm to fork, and to reduce the frequency, impact and severity of foodborne illness outbreaks, there have to be effective working partnerships and cooperation throughout the entire food chain. 

The goal of the Risk Communication theme is to develop best practices for active engagement of multiple audiences in effective risk communications prior to, during and after potentially catastrophic food bioterrorism incidents. Here, a Risk Communication Toolkit, training modules, publications, and other projects may be found.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued its Strategic Plan for Risk Communication, which outlines the agency’s efforts to disseminate more meaningful public health information. The plan also lays out a framework for the FDA to provide information about FDA-regulated products to health care professionals, patients and consumers in the form they need it and when they need it, and for how the agency oversees industry communications. Document is available here as well.

This article explores the provision of information about regulatory enforcement, proactive risk management, scientific uncertainty and risk variability were manipulated in an experiment designed to examine their impact on consumer perceptions of food risk management quality. In order to compare consumer reactions across different cases, three food hazards were selected (mycotoxins on organically grown food, pesticide residues, and a genetically modified potato).

The purpose of this Framework is to support all Health Canada and PHAC professionals involved in risk management activities in integrating effective risk communications into their work. One way it can do this is by fostering and enabling collaboration throughout the Department and the Agency. Building on successful current practices in Health Canada and the PHAC, the Framework outlines a strategic, systematic approach to risk communications within the context of integrated risk management. The approach is intended to be flexible enough to address internal and external risk communications for all types of risk issues — from corporate risk issues to health-specific risk issues.

This publication explores the shortcomings of the regulatory role of FSIS, with emphasis on risk analysis and consumer perception. The authors suggest new ways for improving the planning of risk communication.

The Crisis, Emergency, and Risk (CERC) Toolkit evolved from Santa Clara County's increased understanding and recognition of the need to build a strong operational framework for emergency public communication activities.

Toolkit materials are predicated on "lessons learned" from actual events and best practices from the numerous trainings, drills, tabletops and exercises in which we have been participants and/or facilitators.

The goal of the CERC Toolkit is to provide information and materials to other public health departments and assist in the development and organization of public information activities.

The ultimate goal of this toolkit is for all public health departments to be better prepared in order to communicate efficiently and effectively in a public health emergency.

Gives a brief introduction to Risk Communication, and why it has become increasingly necessary to effectively communicate food safety risks from risk assessors to risk managers. Provides a general list of ways to communicate risk.

This self instruction course is designed to enhance individuals' understanding of communication of health risks associated with the environment, using methodologies with theoretical and practical approaches applicable in Latin America and the Caribbean.

A series of seven on-line tutorials on various facets of risk communication. Titles include "Risk Communication Strategies," "Psychological Factors Influencing How People React to Risk Information," "Involving the Public in Risk Communication," "Giving Public Presentations of Risk Information," "Working with the Media," "Crisis Communication," and "Evaluating Risk Communication"

Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis, New Orleans, LA, December 10, 2002. It discusses the analytical and experiential approaches to understanding risk, and how these factor in to risk management

This twice monthly journal publishes articles on bacteria and other microorganisms. Sections include "Molecular Biology of Pathogens," "Enzymes and Proteins," "Population Genetics and Evolution," and many more. Full text is available for articles over six months old. Newer articles require a subscription, but abstracts may be viewed online for free

Address given at the Interim Scientific Advisory Forum in Brussels, Belgium on October 30, 2001. This talk addresses the importance of risk communication in ensuring consumer confidence in the food supply, and outlines guidelines for risk communication

This report was presented at the FAO/WHO Global Forum of Food Safety Regulators in Marrakesh, Morocco, on January 28-30, 2002. It was prepared by Germany on the basis of the report of the WHO Expert Consultation "The Interaction Between Assessors and Managers of Microbiological Hazards in Food", held in Kiel, Germany, on March 21-23, 2000. The report discusses the functional separation of risk assessment and risk management, the interaction between risk assessors and risk managers, transparency, and the recommendations of the Expert Consultation