The Experts below are selected from a list of 143823 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Peter Sarlin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Macroprudential oversight, Risk Communication and visualization
Journal of Financial Stability, 2016Co-Authors: Peter SarlinAbstract:This paper discusses the role of Risk Communication in macroprudential oversight and of visualization in Risk Communication. Beyond the increase in data availability and precision, the transition from firm-centric to system-wide supervision imposes vast data needs. Moreover, in addition to internal Communication as in any organization, broad and effective external Communication of timely information related to systemic Risks is a key mandate of macroprudential supervisors. This further stresses the importance of simple representations of complex data. The present paper focuses on the background and theory of information visualization and visual analytics, as well as techniques within these fields, as potential means for Risk Communication. We define the task of visualization in Risk Communication, discuss the structure of macroprudential data, and review visualization techniques applied to systemic Risk. We conclude that two essential, yet rare, features for supporting the analysis of big data and Communication of Risks are analytical visualizations and interactive interfaces. For visualizing the so-called macroprudential data cube, we provide the VisRisk platform with three modules: plots, maps and networks. While VisRisk is herein illustrated with five web-based interactive visualizations of systemic Risk indicators and models, the platform enables and is open to the visualization of any data from the macroprudential data cube.
-
Macroprudential Oversight, Risk Communication and Visualization
LSE Research Online Documents on Economics, 2014Co-Authors: Peter SarlinAbstract:This paper discusses the role of Risk Communication in macroprudential oversight and of visualization in Risk Communication. Beyond the soar in data availability and precision, the transition from firm-centric to system-wide supervision imposes vast data needs. Moreover, except for internal Communication as in any organization, broad and effective external Communication of timely information related to systemic Risks is a key mandate of macroprudential supervisors, further stressing the importance of simple representations of complex data. This paper focuses on the background and theory of information visualization and visual analytics, as well as techniques within these fields, as potential means for Risk Communication. We define the task of visualization in Risk Communication, discuss the structure of macroprudential data, and review visualization techniques applied to systemic Risk. We conclude that two essential, yet rare, features for supporting the analysis of big data and Communication of Risks are analytical visualizations and interactive interfaces. For visualizing the so-called macroprudential data cube, we provide the VisRisk platform with three modules: plots, maps and networks. While VisRisk is herein illustrated with five web-based interactive visualizations of systemic Risk indicators and models, the platform enables and is open to the visualization of any data from the macroprudential data cube.
Andrea H. Mcmakin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Risk Communication: A Handbook for Communicating Environmental, Safety, and Health Risks, Fourth Edition - Evaluating Risk Communication Efforts
Risk Communication, 1Co-Authors: Regina E. Lundgren, Andrea H. McmakinAbstract:Every Risk Communication effort should undergo some sort of evaluation. Whenever possible, evaluations should be conducted during as well as at the end of a project. Information from the evaluation can be used to refine Risk Communication policies, procedures, and practices. Most organizations involved in Risk Communication efforts communicate Risk more than once. Information gained from one effort can be applied to strengthen future efforts. This chapter lists evaluation factors to be considered for care, consensus, and crisis Risk Communication, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of using various evaluators. It ends with a checklist for evaluating Risk Communication efforts.
-
Risk Communication: A Handbook for Communicating Environmental, Safety, and Health Risks, Fourth Edition - International Risk Communication
Risk Communication, 1Co-Authors: Regina E. Lundgren, Andrea H. McmakinAbstract:Risks, such as foodborne illnesses, start in one country but travel rapidly around the world. And Risk Communication travels just as quickly. This chapter provides specific strategies for international Risk Communication. To plan Risk Communication strategies for individual countries, be sure to consult experts from those locations and review countryhspecific research. Do not immediately assume that Risk Communication is wildly different worldwide. Each country and population group may have its own characteristics that affect how people perceive and communicate Risks. These characteristics may include religious beliefs, health and environmental regulations, and community traditions. Understand the cultural attributes of the areas in which you are communicating and form strategies around them. When communicating across countries, research all applicable laws and regulations that affect the situation.
-
Risk Communication: A Handbook for Communicating Environmental, Safety, and Health Risks, Fourth Edition - Principles of Risk Communication
Risk Communication, 1Co-Authors: Regina E. Lundgren, Andrea H. McmakinAbstract:The Risk Communication literature discusses a number of principles regarding how best to communicate Risk. This chapter focuses on principles of Risk Communication that are within the purview of those who are communicating Risk: the principles related to the Risk Communication process, Risk Communication presentation, and Risk comparison. Unless specifically noted, these principles apply equally to care, consensus, and crisis Communication. The principles that have been developed through years of study can be distilled into two maxims: know the audience and know the situation. The Risk communicator should know about the needs of the audience (what they want to know and what the Risk communicator needs to tell them to help deal with the Risk), the manner/mode of receipt the information by the audience, and what the Risk communicator can do within certain constraints.
Ann Bostrom - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Progress in Risk Communication since the 1989 NRC report: response to ‘Four questions for Risk Communication’ by Roger Kasperson
Journal of Risk Research, 2014Co-Authors: Ann BostromAbstract:While lauding research progress in Risk Communication, Roger Kasperson despairs of change in Risk Communication practices. Advances are nevertheless evident on several fronts, including the development and application of pragmatic and evidence-driven approaches to Risk Communication design, implementation of new engagement strategies, and efforts to communicate uncertainty. Systematic reviews in Risk Communication research are starting to appear, and will likely help clarify the lessons to be learned. Progress in these areas suggests building on current momentum by continuing to encourage: (1) systematic reviews of research and trends in Risk Communication; (2) judgment and decision-making research to inform Risk Communication design; and (3) integrative Risk Communication research, across disciplines and application domains.
-
Vaccine Risk Communication
American journal of preventive medicine, 1998Co-Authors: Michael A. Stoto, Geoffrey Evans, Ann BostromAbstract:Childhood vaccines are among the most effective preventive interventions that exist. In recent years, however, concerns about the Risks of vaccination have arisen and, in some cases, have caused parents to consider not having their children immunized. In order to improve the process of Communication and decision-making by parents and physicians, the Institute of Medicine’s Vaccine Safety Forum convened a workshop to discuss Risk Communication. This article summarizes the workshop’s discussions; a more complete report1 is available on the World Wide Web at www2.nas.edu/hpdp/. Health Risk Communication has traditionally consisted of messages designed to encourage behavior that reduces individual and societal Risk (e.g., smoking cessation and seat-belt use).2 Increasingly, Risk Communication is seen as an interactive process of an exchange of information and opinion among individuals, groups, and institutions.3 To be effective, Risk Communications must address the experiences, beliefs, values, and attitudes of message recipients as well as providers. Understanding how Risks are perceived and the inherent biases of both message providers and recipients is key to good Risk Communication.4 Although health Risk Communication has been an active research area for several decades, the science and practice of vaccine Risk Communication are not yet well developed. Many of the problems with Risk Communication in general, however, apply to vaccine Risks.5 Recent studies illustrate specific factors influencing how vaccine Risks and benefits are perceived by and acted on by consumers and vaccine providers. Individuals’ immunization decisions, for instance, are influenced by decisions that others make. People might prefer to do what a majority of others do or may take advantage of the protection afforded by high immunization rates and not be vaccinated; they may also be influenced to vaccinate by the fact that vaccination would protect others. Other factors include perceptions of disease Risk and the ability to control those Risks, and preferences for the Risks of diseases per se over Risks of the vaccine against them. In particular, the rarity of vaccinepreventable diseases in the vaccine era makes it more difficult to communicate the Risks of these diseases. Information on vaccine benefits and Risks is currently limited in availability and scope. Information available to consumers today includes the vaccine information statements (VIS) issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), material from other federal agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH), manufacturers’ package inserts that accompany vaccines, oral Communications from health care providers, and information provided by a variety of nonprofit and consumer organizations. Three major themes emerged during the workshop. First, Risk Communication is a dynamic process in which many participate, and these individuals are influenced by a wide range of circumstances, interests, and information needs. Effective Risk Communication depends on the providers’ and recipients’ understanding more than simply the Risks and benefits; background experiences and values also influence the process. Good Risk Communication recognizes a diversity of form and content needs in the general population. Both the method and content of Risk Communication should reflect the goals of the Communication, which could include advocacy, education, and development of a decision-making partnership (in any combination). To be effective, it was suggested, Risk Communication about vaccines needs to take into account what people already know or believe about the Risks and benefits associated with immunization. Vaccine Risk communicators should consider the varied information needs of the audience. Some recipients of Risk Communication material prefer short, simple messages that explain the Risks and benefits of vaccines in nontechnical language; others want as much scientific information as is available. Currently, the primary sources of consumer information on vaccines are criticized either as being too simplistic and incomplete (the VISs, for instance) or having too much technical information for some people to understand and process effectively (for example, From the Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC 20418 Address Correspondence to: Michael A. Stoto, Institute of Medicine, 2101 Constitution Avenue N.W., Washington, DC 20418
Caron Chess - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Organizational theory and the stages of Risk Communication.
Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2001Co-Authors: Caron ChessAbstract:The evolution of Risk Communication has been described as a series of Communication strategies. This article suggests that organizational theory provides another dimension to understanding the evolution of Risk Communication, and that Risk Communication can be seen as an organizational adaptation of chemical manufacturers to external pressure. Following the tragedy in Bhopal the chemical manufacturing sector's loss of legitimacy led to destabilization of its authority and to increased uncertainty in its external environment. Risk Communication was one means to increase legitimacy, thereby decreasing uncertainty and potential impact on resources. However, although Risk Communication may evolve from crises of legitimacy, the concept of “isomorphism”—conformance to norms within a corporate sector—predicts this need not be the case.
-
Improving Risk Communication in Government: Research Priorities
Risk Analysis, 1995Co-Authors: Caron Chess, Kandice L. Salomone, Billie Jo HanceAbstract:Despite the increased interest in Risk Communication among government agencies, there is evidence that agencies’Risk Communication practices lag. We conducted a study to explore which Risk Communication research would be most important to improve government agencies’Risk Communication practices. Qualitative interviews and a survey of 145 Risk Communication experts based in academic institutions and government agencies explored how important research on each of 48 topics would be to improving agencies’Risk Communication efforts. Respondents identified topics within three areas as priorities for further research: 1) involving communities in agency decisionmaking; 2) communicating with communities of different races, ethnic backgrounds, and incomes; and 3) evaluating Risk Communication. Both practitioners and researchers responded to additional statements about agencies’Risk Communication practices with reservations about staff and managers’commitment to effective Communication about environmental issues. We discuss the implications of these findings.
-
Rhetoric and Reality: Risk Communication in Government Agencies
The Journal of Environmental Education, 1992Co-Authors: Caron Chess, Kandice L. SalomoneAbstract:Abstract Government agencies and industries are increasingly grappling with ways to address the problems caused by the different ways that laypeople and experts perceive environmental Risks. This article summarizes the results of two studies that examined the extent of philosophical commitment to Risk Communication by government agencies compared with the Risk Communication practices of these agencies. Both studies suggest a gap between the stated commitment of government agencies to Risk Communication and their practices. The authors suggest how that gap may be bridged.
Branden B. Johnson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
of Risk Communication
2016Co-Authors: Branden B. JohnsonAbstract:The conveyance of technical Risk information from experts to the lay public is unlikely to be successful unless the social context of such messages is addressed. This context includes social networks, economic resources, political rights and responsibilities, histories, and ideologies. Social context can be taken into account by clearly defining desired outcomes, identifying the information desired by citizens, and choosing communicators carefully. Technical and social perspectives on Risk Communication, incomplete in themselves, can in combination improve management of hazards. The emerging field of Risk Communication has emphasized the meaningful conveyance of technical information from Risk experts to laypeople. This paper argues that the social context of Risk Communication is just as important, and sometimes more important, than the technical issues with which the field has largely been concerned. Messages are ultimately conveyed from person to person; what and how Risk messages are received will be affected by our relations with the communicator, other humans, and the material artifacts concerned. Although the importance of social context has been "recognized," this recognition has been relatively superficial. A first approximation of "social context" is compared here to the current emphasis in Risk Communication. The examples used in this article deal with hazardous waste, hazardous facility siting, and natural disasters, but the arguments made apply as well to other hazards (e.g., radon, occupational safety and health). The focus is on how lay receivers of Risk messages are affected by social context, but the influence of social context on the construction of Risk messages is also important.1 Tasks for Risk communicators which combine the technical and social context approaches are suggested, and some barriers to the use of Risk Communication based on social context are briefly noted.
-
Coping with Paradoxes of Risk Communication: Observations and Suggestions1
Risk Analysis, 1993Co-Authors: Branden B. JohnsonAbstract:The maturation of the field of Risk Communication has resulted in several manuals, a National Research Council review, a Society for Risk Analysis subgroup, and critics. Critics Pieter-Jan Stalen and Rob Coppock, and Harry Otway and Brian Wynne, have pointed out that much Risk Communication is impractical or paradoxical. In this letter, the author supports many of the criticisms of these critics, but also discusses errors and omissions in their viewpoints that he feels will inhibit progress in effective Risk Communication. Topics discussed are motivations for Risk Communication, the practicality of advice, the audience for Risk Communication, credibility, and whose interests are best served by Risk Communication. The purpose of this essay is therefore to spur further debate on the issue of Risk Communication. 13 refs.
