1 / 21

Communicating Risk with PLT

Communicating Risk with PLT. Naoko Kakuta , ERIC Keiichi Sato, TUAT. Our Study for FoR. Interviewed 11 experts on risk communication. Tried out activities on risks: Crossroads; Negotiate Killer. Translated Focus on Risk.

maina
Download Presentation

Communicating Risk with PLT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Communicating Risk with PLT Naoko Kakuta, ERIC Keiichi Sato, TUAT

  2. Our Study for FoR • Interviewed 11 experts on risk communication. • Tried out activities on risks: Crossroads; Negotiate Killer. • Translated Focus on Risk. • Developed guidelines: scientific literacy, citizenship, thinking skills and concerns on social issues such as risk.

  3. Opinion Spectrum • 1mSv/y Ordinary people’s annual limit(Japan by law*) • 5mSv/y ChernobylEvacuation Area • 5.2mSv/y Specialists entering to a controlled area* • 1-20mSv/y After the accident being controlled(ICRP) • 20-100mSv/yEmergency after the accident(ICRP) • 50mSv/y Radiation wokers*+zone of no return • 100mSv Dr. Yamashita and MEXT

  4. Communicating Nuke Risk

  5. Key Stages for Communication • Risk Perception • Accidents Information • Risk Assessment • Risk Reduction • Risk Management

  6. Principles for Communication • Open, transparency • Multidirectional • Process of participation • Public perception • Societal values and ethics • Scientific judgment • Political and economic factors

  7. Levels of Radiation – MEXT textbook

  8. Too Famous Fukushima

  9. Level of Contamination of Schools

  10. Calculation: Everybody learned • X μSv/h ×24hours× 365days = Y μSv/y • YμSv/y=1/1000 Y mSv/y • 1mSv/y=0.1μSv/h • 1mSv/yis a limit set for ordinary people for ordinary time. • Japanese Government extended the limit to 20mSv/y for children at school in Fukushima. • Schools with 2.28μSv/h and over are limited for outside activities down to three hours a day.

  11. Where should be the line?

  12. Barriers • Risk perception control before the accidents. • “Science” was used to accept 100mSv. • “No epidemic proof exist” was the reason for “Safe” level of exposure. Japanese Merchants of Doubt • “No more nukes” decision at the end of August, but “No Nukes Here and Now”went on. no celebration, no change of strategies, just “No Nukes” forever

  13. Risk perception controls • “Nukes are safe” PRs on medias. • Nukes poster design contests, essay contests at schools. • Subsidies and budgets for municipal governments of nuclear plants. • Employments for the plants. • Total money put into these?

  14. $98 billion ! • Since 1974, promotion ofpower resourcesdevelopmenttaxwas used to cover all these subsidies for nukes. The tax was paid by the power companies. • Power companies also donate money for contests, festivals and “risk communications”, besides for this tax. Which adds up to $31 billion over 40 years of nukes history.

  15. Is 20mSv/y really safe? • Zoning started for the refugees: • Unlivable for many years, zone of no return, over 50 mSv/y, compensation of $60,000 for 5 years. • Permitted for visits only, between 20-50mSv/y. • After decontamination of this 20mSv and under zone, people are allowed to come back. • Back or not, more than 40,000 people will be kept on the edge.

  16. 25000 cannot return to their home. Zone of over 50msv/y

  17. So, who cares for these refugees? • Actually the refugees are the one who’s been gasping down all these nukes money. These municipalities are still poor? Rubbish! • Another barriers for dialogue….

  18. Why is this? • Doubt?Fear?Distrust? Envy? • Lack of self confidence • Lack of experience of cooperation • Too big for dialogue • So, just this “anti” type of movements continue.

  19. Where are we? • Fatigue • Flight • Focusless • Frail • Forgetful • Futureless • Lack of experience of risk communication.

  20. Teaching Materials Guidelines • Understanding the nature of science, including scientific uncertainty, controversial etc. • “Society and Risk” --Learning from the past, focusing on our common future • Action Orientation* • Emphasis on skills building* • *NAAEE

  21. Shared Vision for the Future • We have only one Earth. • We all want to survive, us human, as well as other living things. • We have to learn to live together. • We have to learn to cooperate. • http://www.globalcommunity.org/flash/wombat.shtml

More Related