Chapter 3. Laws That Mandate Risk Communication
This chapter describes highlights of some of the major federal laws within the United States. Areas of laws that risk communication is mandated vary from CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) to the Privacy Rule. These laws and regulations listed in this text can be largely divided into two in terms of the purpose of regulations: laws that are required in order for an organization to effectively communicate with its public and facilitate public involvement; laws that are required in order to safeguard publics from harms that can be caused by the inappropriate process of risk communication. The Privacy Rule (p. 42) is one of the latter.
Most of the laws include provisions such as “release information/ documents for public comment” or “hold public meetings to collect comments.” The common concept of the requirements seems to be that they encourage government agencies and organizations to actively and effectively engage in communication with the public. This common concept further explains why the two terms, “risk communication” and “public involvement”, are used interchangeably in this textbook and many of the regulations.
Although many organizations and communication professionals have realized the importance of understanding the laws and regulations, it may not be easy to find the laws and regulations that are applicable specifically to the topics of their risk communication activities. The Table 3-1 shows applicable laws and regulations in various cases of risk communication (p. 44). Although the table provides merely a rough guide to find the appropriate authorities, it may be a good starting point of searching in advance of a risk communication effort.
The purpose of the mandatory requirement can also be understood as an effort to minimize the constraints that can hinder in the process of effective risk communication. Laws and regulations mandate a series of activities, such as producing accurate and precise information, making it readily available to publics for transparency and facilitating meeting for comments and involvement. Such regulatory support will help to reduce those constraints both on the communicator and from the audience, as mentioned in Chapter 4, to some extent.
Of course, the laws that mandate risk communication should be understood as a bottom line which is the minimal standards that should be lived up to. Government agencies and organizations would have to make further efforts to fully execute effective risk communication. As mentioned in the very beginning of the chapter, however, risk communication is often conducted merely as a result of a law, regulation, or other government inducement. It is critical to effective risk communication that the management level in an organization is aware of the value of risk communication to their business. Risk communication should be understood as one of the key elements of corporate sustainability management.
Most of the laws include provisions such as “release information/ documents for public comment” or “hold public meetings to collect comments.” The common concept of the requirements seems to be that they encourage government agencies and organizations to actively and effectively engage in communication with the public. This common concept further explains why the two terms, “risk communication” and “public involvement”, are used interchangeably in this textbook and many of the regulations.
Although many organizations and communication professionals have realized the importance of understanding the laws and regulations, it may not be easy to find the laws and regulations that are applicable specifically to the topics of their risk communication activities. The Table 3-1 shows applicable laws and regulations in various cases of risk communication (p. 44). Although the table provides merely a rough guide to find the appropriate authorities, it may be a good starting point of searching in advance of a risk communication effort.
The purpose of the mandatory requirement can also be understood as an effort to minimize the constraints that can hinder in the process of effective risk communication. Laws and regulations mandate a series of activities, such as producing accurate and precise information, making it readily available to publics for transparency and facilitating meeting for comments and involvement. Such regulatory support will help to reduce those constraints both on the communicator and from the audience, as mentioned in Chapter 4, to some extent.
Of course, the laws that mandate risk communication should be understood as a bottom line which is the minimal standards that should be lived up to. Government agencies and organizations would have to make further efforts to fully execute effective risk communication. As mentioned in the very beginning of the chapter, however, risk communication is often conducted merely as a result of a law, regulation, or other government inducement. It is critical to effective risk communication that the management level in an organization is aware of the value of risk communication to their business. Risk communication should be understood as one of the key elements of corporate sustainability management.
posted by Minji at
1/22/2007 01:40:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home