ABSTRACT
The inadequacy of direct regulatory control of health, environmental, and technological hazards has triggered an accelerating interest in risk communication as an alternative form of risk management. This chapter discusses the assumptions and issues inherent in two paradigms of risk communication. The first paradigm, classical risk communication, follows a linear model that structures communication into senders, media, messages, and receivers. It aims to persuade the public in accepting scientific and bureaucratic judgments of risk acceptability as well as decisions on risk management. The second paradigm, dialectical risk communication, goes beyond ensuring that one’s message is transmitted and listened to. Rather, it is a process of empowering stakeholders to appreciate different perspectives on risk, scrutinize opinions and perceptions about risk, and sharpen the skills necessary to make informed judgments that consequently have impacts on individual and community lifestyles and policies. The authors argue that the dialectical model of risk communication is best suited for providing the public a better understanding of issues that affect their decisions on health and safety.
