The Real Problem

Learn from your mistakes. We’re told this over and over our whole lives, so why shouldn’t it work for risk communication, right? It seems logical; however, it’s much more complicated than it sounds. An excerpt from Mad Cows and Mother’s Milk, by Leiss and Powell, entitled “A Diagnostic for Risk Communication Failures” addresses this very issue.

In researching the topic of flooding, I’ve attempted to come across some of these specific “failures.” Now, after reading about methods for the study of risk communication failures, I see where I went wrong. I failed to “track meticulously the media coverage of developing risk controversies.” It’s a great idea in theory - to reference newspaper and other media accounts, records of public hearings and the activities of public-interests groups. However, it seems to me that the only people who could attempt this comprehensive research are experts.

Do you have to be an expert in the field in order to be successful at fully understanding the issue? How do I, full-time employee by day and full-time student by night, attempt to overcome this challenge?

The text provides guidance in terms of questions to ask and information to gather:

What did the experts know and when did they know it?

What did members of the public know and when did they know it?

What effort, if any, did risk managers make to explain clearly to the public the
risk and benefit assessments they had conducted?

What effort, if any, did risk managers make to understand thoroughly the nature of public concerns?

What events fueled public concern?

What was the nature of media reporting of relevant events?

As the public awareness of the issue was developing, did any agency seek to take responsibility for the issue and to address the risk information gap?


These are great starting points, but the authors never dive deeper than theories. How can I realistically find the answers to these questions? This excerpt is less a “method” and more wishful thinking for researching in an ideal world where time and access are a nonissue.

Since we are on the outside looking in, it may be impossible for us to never know the answers. It's always overwhelming when we realize our own ignorance, but we can only make assumptions based upon the information we stumble across. Is that good enough?

Do Something About It!

According to the National Weather Service (NWS), flooding causes more damage in the United States than any other severe weather related event, an average of $4.6 billion a year in the past 20 years (1984-2003). What would you do if you couldn't get coverage under flood insurance?

The NWS posted the following question and answer on its website devoted to flood safety:
Q: Is there anything I can do to prepare for a flood?
How to reduce potential flood damage and what to include in a family disaster plan can be obtained from the American Red Cross.

The NWS works with and relies on strategic partners involved in floodplain management, flood hazard mitigation, flood preparedness, and flood warnings to reduce the loss of life and property due to floods. Key partners include the U.S. Geological Survey, FEMA, the National Hydrologic Warning Council, the Association of State Floodplain Managers, the American Red Cross, the National Safety Council, the Federal Alliance for Safe Homes, The Weather Channel, and other media outlets, and many other government and private sector organizations.

The government seems to be the only organization with the power and money to actively help people prepare for and respond to flood emergencies. It can partner with other organizations to bring about action. However, this is the only response they have to the desperate cry for help. When the public asks, “What can I do?” the response from the most capable source should not be vague and uninformative, displacing responsibility elsewhere.

It is up to risk communicators to build upon existing resources and to make sure people are aware of them. In order for more effective communications to be developed, more research must be done to understand the target demographic. The previously mentioned government and nonprofit organizations must effectively combine their resources to create effective communication efforts.

Digging Deeper

Floods are the most common natural disaster in the United States, according to the National Weather Service. Some typical effects of floods are physical damage, casualties due to drowning or disease, contamination of water supplies and shortage of crops and food supplies. It is often difficult or impossible to obtain insurance policies which cover destruction of property due to flooding, since floods are a relatively predictable risk.

In recent months, flooding has been at the forefront of the Pittsburgh local news - mainly because it continually affects the same areas – Millvale, Turtle Creek and Carnegie to name a few. The residents of these areas have begun to speak up about the destruction they’ve had to endure.

An article that ran in the August 30, 2007 issue of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette relayed the story of Ralph Beatty, a Wilkins homeowner and landlord. Three feet of water poured into Beatty’s property every time it rained during the storms of August. “This is costing me $1,500 a month, and nobody has come out here to try and solve this flooding issue. No one seems to be able to take responsibility for this," he said. Stories like this one are clearly a red flag that risk communication needs to be improved.

In the same Post-Gazette article, a township code enforcement officer commented, “We can't do anything about it because the Department of Environmental Protection has jurisdiction over streams, placement of bridges and culverts." A DEP spokeswoman said the department is "very aware of the problem. We have been in court with this property owner over this issue since 1997." These comments clearly demonstrate the huge role that demographics and geography play in risk communication. The issues that people in these areas face have been around for a long time.

These comments sparked my interest in discovering what the government has done for the city residents in reaction to flood activity. In 1935, the United States House of Representatives passed a bill for nine flood control reservoirs to be built above Pittsburgh. However, while the Senate debated this bill, the worst flood in Pittsburgh history occurred. Since then, the affected populations have pressed the government to use its financial and political assets to actively prevent flood emergencies.

In recent years, the government has developed http://www.floodsmart.gov/, a resource intended to help the public prepare for, endure and recover from floods. It employs statistics, images, videos and interactive tools to educate and raise awareness. My concern with this method of risk communication is that it is not all-encompassing. Risk communications will only be effective if they are tailored to their target audience. This is our biggest challenge with communicating the risk of flood damage.

I'm intrigued by improving flood risk communication because it is a real problem and a local problem. People need to be better prepared and to fully be aware of these risks. Whether it’s more obtainable flood insurance, flood prevention or flood recovery, all aspects of flood risk communications are in desperate need of improvement.

The Problem

I'm an English Writing and Studio Arts major and am currently working in marketing for the American Red Cross Southwestern Pennsylvania Chapter. My employment involves risk communication every day and there are many obstacles to overcome. The biggest obstacle for the Red Cross is that we deal primarily with response - we help people recover from disasters like house fires and floods on a daily basis.

In order for risk communicators to do our job better, we need people to be more prepared and to fully be aware of these risks. For this reason, I'd like to fully explore risk communication involving flooding. Certain areas of Pittsburgh are extremely susceptible to flooding, so demographics and geography will play a big part in risk communication.

As we've seen in recent months, flooding has been at the forefront of the local news - mainly because it happens over and over again in the same places. This is a red flag to me that risk communication can be improved. Whether it's flood insurance, flood prevention or flood recovery, all aspects of flood events can use improvement.

Floods are an unfortunate event because they often strike the same areas over and over again. It is for this reason that I'm intrigued by improving risk communication in this arena. The biggest challenge with these topics will be discovering an effective way to improve risk communication, as these issues have been present for a very long time.