ABSTRACT Among risk experts, risk communication is regarded as being at the heart of the risk man... more ABSTRACT Among risk experts, risk communication is regarded as being at the heart of the risk management process. Although the International Organization for Standardization agreed a definition of risk communication in 2002 as the exchange or sharing of information about risk between the decision-maker and other stakeholders, a survey by the STARC consortium has shown that the actual practice of risk communication varies widely from one country to another. The STARC project, supported under the European Commission’s Sixth Framework Programme, aims to promote co-ordination of national approaches on risk communication and to propose initiatives for involving all stakeholders and civil society in a more dynamic risk governance culture. As part of its work, the STARC consortium surveyed the EU 25 Member States and six other countries, namely, Australia, Canada, Japan, Norway, Switzerland and the United States on their use and practice of risk communication. A questionnaire was e-mailed to the 31 countries in December 2005. We had responses to our survey from 28 countries. In addition, the STARC D2 report provides the results of in-depth interviews on risk communication practices in three industrial sectors in France, Germany, Hungary and Switzerland. The sector analyses were based on interviews with experts, senior risk managers and risk communicators from administrations, industry and civil society organisations. Conclusions from the country survey From the responses to the risk communication questionnaire, the STARC partners drew a number of conclusions and identified good practices, among which are the following. We agree with Canada and find that it is a good practice to regard risk communication as a continuum (or as a cycle) in which emergency and crisis communications should be a part. We think provision should be made for eliciting and considering the views of stakeholders, including the public for all types of risk events. Based on the results of this survey, it appears that a majority of countries do not require companies listed on a stock exchange to include in their annual reports a risk assessment and how they are managing risks. We think, as a matter of good practice, there should be such a requirement. Most respondents said that their risk management plans do refer to risk communication, and we find that this is a good practice. However, there should also be separate, generic risk communications plans or guidelines, as in the UK and a few other countries. In our view, good practice favours risk communication beginning at the pre-assessment / assessment stage, since stakeholders, including the public, may bring information that might not otherwise come to light from the experts, and stakeholders will certainly bring their values and opinions, which may well be different from those of the experts and/or risk manager. We regard as good practice the process of identifying stakeholders or stakeholder groups (in as fine-grained detail as possible) and encouraging their participation in the risk management process. We also regard government surveys of stakeholders’ perceptions of risks as a good practice. Such surveys will help inform risk managers as well as stakeholders about how their fellow citizens and groups of citizens perceive risks, and the relative importance they attach to risks. In our view, it would be good practice to publish the results of such surveys. We regard co-ordination of risk communication between the private and public sectors as good practice, so long as it is not an instance of regulatory capture. The Seveso II directive provides a model of good practice with regard to such co-ordination. We also consider it a matter of good practice for countries to co-ordinate their risk communications, not only horizontally with other government departments and vertically with other levels of government, but also with stakeholders and with neighbouring countries. The EU’s Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC) could play a catalytic role in stimulating such co-ordination with neighbouring countries. Given the differences in approaches to and practices of risk communication, it strikes us that there would be considerable merit in (as a minimum) EU member states having some structured forum or meeting, perhaps annually, where they could exchanges views on good practices. We do not think it is practical or desirable to force harmonisation of risk communication practices on member states, nevertheless, an exchange of experiences about what has worked and what hasn’t in what situations would presumably lead to improved risk communication, better consultation with stakeholders and improved co-ordination, both horizontally and vertically, especially between governments. Conclusions from the sector analyses The STARC partners made an analysis of risk communication practices in three sectors in four countries. The partners conducted in-depth interviews with representatives from the chemical…
As a resuit of thé Toulouse catastrophe of thé 21st September 2001, a new law on thé Prévention o... more As a resuit of thé Toulouse catastrophe of thé 21st September 2001, a new law on thé Prévention of Technological and Natural Risks has introduced thé création of "Local Committees for Information and Concerted Actions". The aim of thé Local Committees is to promote debates on technological risks among thé stakeholders and increase transparency in thé decision-making process related to risks resulting in particular from "Seveso" industrial sites.
Il était entendu en France, depuis le début des années 1970, néolibéralisme oblige, que les entre... more Il était entendu en France, depuis le début des années 1970, néolibéralisme oblige, que les entreprises publiques étaient une anomalie économique, une survivance du colbertisme appelée à disparaître du fait de son inadéquation au monde moderne. La gestion de services publics non facturés selon la règle du juste prix était sous le feu de la critique en raison des « distorsions de concurrence » dont elle était réputée être le prétexte et de la démonstration de plus en plus souvent apportée, disait-on, que des entreprises privées pouvaient faire mieux pour moins cher.
Le présent article rend compte de la manière avec laquelle le changement au sein d'EdF s'est opér... more Le présent article rend compte de la manière avec laquelle le changement au sein d'EdF s'est opéré et met en évidence les conditions de cette métamorphose. Les modalités de mobilisation des compétences commerciales, ainsi que les modalités de respect des impératifs d'ouverture au marché sont au coeur de ces réflexions. Mots-clés : Libéralisation du marché, conduite du changement, apprentissage organisationnel.
ABSTRACT Among risk experts, risk communication is regarded as being at the heart of the risk man... more ABSTRACT Among risk experts, risk communication is regarded as being at the heart of the risk management process. Although the International Organization for Standardization agreed a definition of risk communication in 2002 as the exchange or sharing of information about risk between the decision-maker and other stakeholders, a survey by the STARC consortium has shown that the actual practice of risk communication varies widely from one country to another. The STARC project, supported under the European Commission’s Sixth Framework Programme, aims to promote co-ordination of national approaches on risk communication and to propose initiatives for involving all stakeholders and civil society in a more dynamic risk governance culture. As part of its work, the STARC consortium surveyed the EU 25 Member States and six other countries, namely, Australia, Canada, Japan, Norway, Switzerland and the United States on their use and practice of risk communication. A questionnaire was e-mailed to the 31 countries in December 2005. We had responses to our survey from 28 countries. In addition, the STARC D2 report provides the results of in-depth interviews on risk communication practices in three industrial sectors in France, Germany, Hungary and Switzerland. The sector analyses were based on interviews with experts, senior risk managers and risk communicators from administrations, industry and civil society organisations. Conclusions from the country survey From the responses to the risk communication questionnaire, the STARC partners drew a number of conclusions and identified good practices, among which are the following. We agree with Canada and find that it is a good practice to regard risk communication as a continuum (or as a cycle) in which emergency and crisis communications should be a part. We think provision should be made for eliciting and considering the views of stakeholders, including the public for all types of risk events. Based on the results of this survey, it appears that a majority of countries do not require companies listed on a stock exchange to include in their annual reports a risk assessment and how they are managing risks. We think, as a matter of good practice, there should be such a requirement. Most respondents said that their risk management plans do refer to risk communication, and we find that this is a good practice. However, there should also be separate, generic risk communications plans or guidelines, as in the UK and a few other countries. In our view, good practice favours risk communication beginning at the pre-assessment / assessment stage, since stakeholders, including the public, may bring information that might not otherwise come to light from the experts, and stakeholders will certainly bring their values and opinions, which may well be different from those of the experts and/or risk manager. We regard as good practice the process of identifying stakeholders or stakeholder groups (in as fine-grained detail as possible) and encouraging their participation in the risk management process. We also regard government surveys of stakeholders’ perceptions of risks as a good practice. Such surveys will help inform risk managers as well as stakeholders about how their fellow citizens and groups of citizens perceive risks, and the relative importance they attach to risks. In our view, it would be good practice to publish the results of such surveys. We regard co-ordination of risk communication between the private and public sectors as good practice, so long as it is not an instance of regulatory capture. The Seveso II directive provides a model of good practice with regard to such co-ordination. We also consider it a matter of good practice for countries to co-ordinate their risk communications, not only horizontally with other government departments and vertically with other levels of government, but also with stakeholders and with neighbouring countries. The EU’s Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC) could play a catalytic role in stimulating such co-ordination with neighbouring countries. Given the differences in approaches to and practices of risk communication, it strikes us that there would be considerable merit in (as a minimum) EU member states having some structured forum or meeting, perhaps annually, where they could exchanges views on good practices. We do not think it is practical or desirable to force harmonisation of risk communication practices on member states, nevertheless, an exchange of experiences about what has worked and what hasn’t in what situations would presumably lead to improved risk communication, better consultation with stakeholders and improved co-ordination, both horizontally and vertically, especially between governments. Conclusions from the sector analyses The STARC partners made an analysis of risk communication practices in three sectors in four countries. The partners conducted in-depth interviews with representatives from the chemical…
As a resuit of thé Toulouse catastrophe of thé 21st September 2001, a new law on thé Prévention o... more As a resuit of thé Toulouse catastrophe of thé 21st September 2001, a new law on thé Prévention of Technological and Natural Risks has introduced thé création of "Local Committees for Information and Concerted Actions". The aim of thé Local Committees is to promote debates on technological risks among thé stakeholders and increase transparency in thé decision-making process related to risks resulting in particular from "Seveso" industrial sites.
Il était entendu en France, depuis le début des années 1970, néolibéralisme oblige, que les entre... more Il était entendu en France, depuis le début des années 1970, néolibéralisme oblige, que les entreprises publiques étaient une anomalie économique, une survivance du colbertisme appelée à disparaître du fait de son inadéquation au monde moderne. La gestion de services publics non facturés selon la règle du juste prix était sous le feu de la critique en raison des « distorsions de concurrence » dont elle était réputée être le prétexte et de la démonstration de plus en plus souvent apportée, disait-on, que des entreprises privées pouvaient faire mieux pour moins cher.
Le présent article rend compte de la manière avec laquelle le changement au sein d'EdF s'est opér... more Le présent article rend compte de la manière avec laquelle le changement au sein d'EdF s'est opéré et met en évidence les conditions de cette métamorphose. Les modalités de mobilisation des compétences commerciales, ainsi que les modalités de respect des impératifs d'ouverture au marché sont au coeur de ces réflexions. Mots-clés : Libéralisation du marché, conduite du changement, apprentissage organisationnel.
Uploads
Papers by Merad Myriam