Use risk perception and risk communication perspective to evaluate the disaster management policy-making process - Essay Example

?USE RISK PERCEPTION AND RISK COMMUNICATION PERSPECTIVE TO EVALUATE THE DISASTER MANAGEMENT POLICY-MAKING PROCESS Introduction The earth has been found to be the only life-supporting planet for now. At least even if humans can live on other planets, it is the earth we all live on now. If the earth is indeed the only home we have for now, then it is very important that we do everything possible as dwellers and caretakers to keep it intact and productive. Without any doubt, disasters – both natural and artificial are one of the worse forms of destruction to the earth. So if we are talking about keeping the earth intact and productive, then we should be thinking of ways of reducing; if not stopping disasters from occurring. The Assam Government Disaster Management Policy (2010) explains that “disaster is a sudden, calamitous event bringing great damage, loss, and destruction and devastation to life and property.” Sadly, the source continues to note that “the damage caused by disasters is immeasurable and varies with the geographical location, climate and the type of the earth surface/degree of vulnerability.” This explanation alone reechoes a very scaring situation whereby the fight against disaster must be embraced with all seriousness and urgency. Speaking of the need to fight disasters, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies Disaster Management is quoted in World Confederation of Physical Therapy (2011) as pointing to disaster management as the most effective way of fighting disaster; explaining that “disaster management is the organization and management of resources and responsibilities for dealing with all humanitarian aspects of emergencies, in particular preparedness, response and recovery in order to lessen the impact of disasters.” This means that disaster management works best in an environment where there is not just the issuance of aid and assistance to people who suffer from disasters but also making plans to ensure that disasters do not occur at all. Most countries, organizations, civil society and individuals have different policy plans that are directed towards disaster management. This is a step in the right direction. However, one other important point to raise is the need to ensure that policies are not just implemented for implementing sake but that they go through all needed processes in policy making. At the evaluation stage of policy making, policy makers are offered the opportunity to critically scrutinize the feasibility, achievability, effectiveness and usefulness of any given policy. Having noted this, it is important to appreciate the fact that for disaster management evaluation to go on successfully without any setbacks, there are a number of factors that need to be put in place and a number of mechanisms that need to be used by facilitators. Two of these factors and mechanisms are risk perception and risk communication perspective. These two elements come in best when utilized will ensure that the eventual implementation of disaster management policies achieve their needed results. To this end, this essay seeks to explore the use of risk perception and risk communication perspective to evaluate a given disaster management policy-making process. Literature Review Overview of disaster management policy making process and its importance Policy making process takes place day in and out in different quarters of organizational set ups. Even at the national level, there are several policy making processes that take place day in and out. Policy making processes are necessitated when the need to have policies in place arise. Sycamnias (2008) states that “according to a dictionary definition, policy is "any course of action followed primarily because it is expedient or advantages in a material sense."” Without any question, disaster management is such an important phenomenon that it needs a whole policy formulation to get it underway. As part of the importance of taking disaster management through the policy making process, taking disaster management through the process of policy formation helps in making the institutionalization of disaster management not with an option but a compulsory one. As stated by Scher (2007), disaster management is important in saving human life since it brings out preventive measures on ensuring that not just artificial disasters are prevented but also natural disasters. This means that when disaster management is put into the form of a policy, all these benefits will be can be assured without any questions. Specifically with natural disasters, the harm of disasters may be prevented not by stopping the disaster from occurring all together but then identifying the coming of the disaster and warning settlers who dwell in areas near the disaster zone to evacuate. With artificial disasters, disaster management helps in stopping disasters from occurring all together. Finally, even after the occurrence of any major an effective disaster management policy would ensure that the effect of the disaster on people is minimized. The role of risk perception in disaster-management policy-making process Generally the disaster management policy making process entails the act of making projections into unseen events in the foreseeable future. This means that the disaster management policy process is built more on assumptions than facts. The only situations that bring about the construction of the policy on facts has to do with situations where by previous experiences are used for developing data for the policy. Other than that, almost all components of the policy are dependent on assumptions and forecasted projections. For this reason, the development of perception building plays a very vital role in the disaster management policy making process. Because the disaster management policy making process entails risk, risk perception is the best form of perception building used in the disaster management policy making process. Sjoberg (2000) explains that “risk perception is a phenomenon in search of an explanation.” the Centre for Toxicology, University of Guelph (2000) also explains that “Risk perception is one’s opinion of the likelihood of risk (the probability of facing harm) associated with performing a certain activity or choosing a certain lifestyle.” This means that risk perception is set off when the need to find an explanation to a situation arises. Therefore in developing policy for disaster management, there are several aspects of risk perception that are used. For instance, there has always been the need to undertake technical estimates of the risk. Technical estimates build on the basis of real risk associated with perceived risk. This means that data in previous risks are used to perceive what an incoming risk or disaster may entail. There is also a component known as risk target. Risk target is an important component in risk perception in that is tries to define a delimitation base as far as the risk group is concerned. Indeed without a very comprehensive risk target in place, budgets and all estimates will be wrongly calculated and this will affect projections in the actual policy that is made. The role of risk communication in disaster-management policy-making process The National Research Council (NRC) defines risk communication as "an interactive process of exchange of information and opinion among individuals, groups, and institutions" (US Public Health Service Prevention Report (1995). Apart from the need to perceive risk from a technical viewpoint, there is also the need for communicating the risk to all stakeholders involved in the disaster management policy making process. In the risk management policy making process, risk communication basically involves the act of disseminating information on the all proposed issues in the policy to all who matter in the policy procedure. It must however be reiterated that risk communication does not happen that easily and in the absence of cautious expertise. This is because the US Public Health Service Prevention Report (1995) posits that “Risk communication (RC) is a complex, multidisciplinary, multidimensional, and evolving process of increasing importance in protecting the public's health.” Just as in public health, risk communication is very complex and technical in disaster management policy making. Indeed without an effective risk communication program, policy makers are likely to fail in the achievement of their goals. For instance there could be a very high level of apathy among citizenry and other people who were otherwise supposed to be beneficiaries of the policy. Such apathy may arise because they will not understand the core components of the policy and would therefore be reluctant in supporting the policy. Policy makers are therefore admonished to implement all principles of risk communication in disaster management policy making process. Such principles are outlined by the US Public Health Service Prevention Report (1995) to include: 1. Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner. 2. Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts. 3. Listen to the public's specific concerns. 4. Be honest, frank, and open. 5. Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources. 6. Meet the needs of the media. 7. Speak clearly and with compassion (source: US Public Health Service Prevention Report, 1995) Case study analysis and Discussion A typical case study can be built with the ongoing perceived risk of the production of nuclear weapons by some countries of the world. As seen in the literature review, risk perception is based on the principle of assumption rather than facts. In the current claims of nuclear weapon production against some nation, there have not been clearly proven facts in this regard. Assumptions have rather been built on suspected activities of some of the nations. The assumptions are based on factors such as the production of uranium based source of electricity. It is worth emphasizing that the reason why the risk perception associated with the production of nuclear weapons have been trumpeted and taken over by major global organizations and nations such as the United Nations, United States and United Kingdom is because of the great risk that comes with nuclear weapons. Pike (1998) explains that “nuclear detonations are the most devastating of the weapons of mass destruction.” Nuclear weapons are so dangerous that they cause havoc that affects humanity including the claiming of life. Nuclear weapons can also be used in not on land but in water and air and destroy other components of the environment. Due to these dangers, the theory of risk communication has been championed by the organizations and nations mentioned earlier. A lot of the risk communication that take place are directed towards warning the public on the risk of nuclear weapons and trying the talk suspecting nations out of the production of nuclear weapons. Conclusions and recommendations for future research This essay was set out to use risk perception and risk communication perspective to evaluate the disaster management policy-making process. In this direction, the various theories and themes of the topic, which include risk perception and risk communication were critically discussed. Later, the relation of risk perception and risk communication in developing disaster management policies were looked at. It was established that much of the success of any disaster policy depends largely on an effective risk perception and risk communication in place. This is because these two phenomenons help in not just controlling disasters but preventing it as well. Based on this conclusion, it is recommended that risk perception and risk communication do not only be considered as conventional part of disaster management policy making but then conscious effort should be made to integrate these two theories into the academic studies of studies who take up disaster management studies at the higher levels of learning. This way when these people eventually become policy makers, they will not have any problem using these all-important theories in their policy making processes. Future researchers are advised to combine these two theories with other risk management principles to ascertain how a multi-theory approach to disaster management can best lead to the prevention of disasters. REFERENCE LIST Assam Government Disaster Management Policy, 2010, ‘What is Disaster?’ Accessed November 19, 2011 Centre for Toxicology, University of Guelph, 2000, ‘What is Risk Perception?’ Accessed November 20, 2011 Pike J, 1998, ‘Nuclear Weapon Effects’, Accessed November 23, 2011 Scher M., 2007, ‘The importance of disaster management plans’, Accessed November 19, 2011 Sjoberg L, 2000, ‘Factors in Risk Perception’ Risk Analysis, Vol. 20 No. 1 US Public Health Service Prevention Report, 1995, ‘Risk Communication: Working with Individuals and Communities to Weigh the Odds’, Accessed November 20, 2011 World Confederation of Physical Therapy, 2011, ‘What is disaster management?’ Accessed November 18, 2011 Read More