single-dr.php

JDR Vol.9 No.sp pp. 608-618
(2014)
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2014.p0608

Review:

Risk Communication in the Field of Radiation

Reiko Kanda

Regulatory Science Research Program, National Institute of Radiological Sciences, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba-shi, Chiba 263-8555, Japan

Received:
February 17, 2014
Accepted:
June 6, 2014
Published:
September 1, 2014
Keywords:
radiation, risk assessment, risk communication, risk perception
Abstract

The handling of the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant (FNPP) operated by Tokyo Electric Power Company further underscores the importance of clear risk communication. The quality of risk communication during this crisis and in its aftermath was evaluated, however, as unsatisfactory by the government, the massmedia, and experts to date. Risk communication problems are divided into those derived from risk and those derived from communication. A lack of skill in communicating the risks involved was major point raised concerning the present situation, but we also face difficulty in informing the general public of radiation risks due to insufficient communication about these risks, a lack of education about radiation before the accident, the uncertainty of risks assessed as due to low-dose radiation, and confusion regarding knowledge about radiation effects and policy for protecting ourselves from radiation. These problems are specific to radiation and cannot be solved by communication skills alone. In this paper, I summarize concepts of radiation protection, low-dose radiation risk assessment, and the Japanese population’s recognition of radiation related to actual and potential risk communication problems about radiation. I will also briefly examine the actual problems of crisis, care, and consensus communication in response to the FNPP accident. These are categorized as either radiation-specific or general problems to discuss the elements needed to solve risk communication problems problems.

Cite this article as:
R. Kanda, “Risk Communication in the Field of Radiation,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.9, No.sp, pp. 608-618, 2014.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] R. Kanda, “Report from Risk Communication Practice,” Igaku-no-Ayumi, Vol.239, No.10, pp. 1043-1049, 2011 (in Japanese).
  2. [2] R. Kanda, “Effects of low-dose radiation based on epidemiological studies ∼ Why the explanations by experts are different ∼,” Isotope News, Vol.693, pp. 28-32, 2012 (in Japanese).
  3. [3] ICRP, “Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection,” ICRP Publication 103, Ann ICRP, Vol.37, Nos.2-4, 2007.
  4. [4] ICRP, “Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection,” ICRP Publication 26, Ann ICRP, Vol.1, No.3, 1977.
  5. [5] A. B. Hill, “The environment and disease: Association or causation?” Proc. R. Soc. Med., Vol.58, pp. 295-300, 1965.
  6. [6] D. L. Preston, E. Ron, S. Tokuoka, S. Funamoto, N. Nishi, M. Soda, K. Mabuchi, and K. Kodama, “Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors, 1958-1998,” Radiat. Res., Vol.168, pp. 1-64, 2007.
  7. [7] J. D. Boice Jr., J. H. Hendry, N. Nakamura, O. Niwa, S. Nakamura, and K. Yoshida, “Low-dose-rate epidemiology of high background radiation areas,” Radiat. Res., Vol.173, pp. 849-854, 2010.
  8. [8] R. Kanda, S. Tsuji, and H. Yonehara, “Perceived risk of nuclear power and other risks during the last 25 years in Japan,” Health Physics, Vol.102, No.4, pp. 384-390, 2012.
  9. [9] P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein, “Roe FJC: Perceived risk: psychological factors and social implications,” Proc. R. Soc. A., Vol.376, pp. 17-34, 1981.
  10. [10] R. Kanda, K. Fujimoto, and S. Kobayashi, “Comparison of risk perception on industrial and social events among three different groups of people who are engaged in education and research activities in Japan,” JPN J. Risk Anal., Vol.6, pp. 88-95, 1994.
  11. [11] R. Kanda, S. Kobayashi, and J. Kanda, “Risk perception on industrial and social events among students of general education course in a Japanese University,” JPN J. Risk Anal., Vol.8, pp. 128-134, 1997.
  12. [12] Japan Atomic Energy Relations Organization, “Survey on the Awareness of European and Japanese Students on Energy and the Environment,” 1993 (in Japanese).
  13. [13] Japan Atomic Energy Relations Organization, “The survey on the word radiation,” 2002 (in Japanese).
  14. [14] Japan Atomic Industrial Forum, “The joint survey of knowledge and interest on radiation among high school students of FNCA countries,” 2003 (in Japanese).
  15. [15] S. Tsuji and R. Kanda, “The questionnaire survey regarding the image of “Radiation” among Japanese public,” JPN J. Risk. Anal., Vol.18, pp. 33-45, 2008 (in Japanese).
  16. [16] S. Tsuji and R. Kanda, “The Factors’ Impact on Public Acceptance of Medical Exposure,” JPN Radiological Technology, Vol.65, No.2, pp. 254-262 (in Japanese).
  17. [17] B. Fischhoff, S. Lichtenstein, P. Slovic, S. L. Derby, and R. L. Keeney, “Acceptable Risk,” New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
  18. [18] R. Kanda, H. Joshima, and S. Kobayashi, “Knowledge and Perception of Risk among Trainees on Radiation Protection Course,” JPN J. Risk Anal., Vol.7, pp. 67-73, 1995.
  19. [19] Ministry of the Environment, “Standard materials about radiation health effects,” 2013 (in Japanese),
    http://www.env.go.jp/chemi/rhm/kisoshiryo-01.html [accessed Aug. 20, 2014]
  20. [20] Reconstruction Agency, “Basic information on radiation risk,” 2014 (in Japanese),
    http://www.reconstruction.go.jp/topics/maincat1/sub-cat1-1/20140603102608.html [accessed Aug. 20, 2014]
  21. [21] Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, “Supplementary readers on radiation,” 2014 (in Japanese),
    http://www.mext.go.jp/b menu/shuppan/sonota/detail/1344732.htm [accessed Aug. 20, 2014]

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, IE9,10,11, Opera.

Last updated on Jan. 18, 2019