Dear
John,
About
your remarks: Whether you
think this is bad information or not, this is what the public hears.
Please,
I didn't write it was a bad information, what I wrote was "the manner of
information is bad to public understand".
How do you think the public respond to any significant
contamination incident, terrorist attack or not?
By
significant I mean Nuclear as Chernobyl, TMI, (I could include
Tokaimura) and Radiological as Goiania:
At the
initial phase, even with a good educational public programme I think
the psychological effects of the accident will be have more or less
impact according with the Government Official Communication to
media and authorities, municipality and state , particularly
immediately after the accident. The Regulatory Authority credibility needs to
be in high rank, mainly in the early phase when urgent actions must to be
taken, and stress and trauma of relocation, the breaking of social ties,
and the people's fear that any radiation exposure is damaging and could
damage health and their children’s future.In this phase, the distress caused by the misperception of
radiation risks will be extremely harmful to
people.
How will the
authorities respond?
This will depend of the
countries capability both to respond technically and to respond
communicating.
Look more than 15 were
lapsed from Chernobyl and Goiania accident, but many technical, political, economic,
social and psychological lessons still remain to be analyzed and learned, lest
any other similar accident take place. In another words: if another scenario
along the lines of the Chernobyl and Goiania accident were to happen in a
developing country, (or even nuclear structured), most probably the same
scenarios will happen again, the competent authority, the organization
dedicated to remediation and the media will repeat the same mistakes, and this
will be a setback for nuclear
energy.
The question is how
do you "educate" the public.
The
great experience of my life was Goiania, so I use it as reference. One of the
lessons from Goiania to educate people, until today is the Brazilian National
Commission of Nuclear Energy BNCNE's Programme BNCNE goes to Schools, and also
to many others Social institutions like LIONS, ROTARY, etc, and, as in many
other countries, has improved the Internet Communication with the public.
Another
lesson was the necessity to train some staff member, including communicators,
in specific of nuclear issues, visiting TV studios and Newspaper headquarters
to understand better media organization to understand motives of media. Most
journalists are generalists, forced by circumstances to educate themselves as
they go along. Regulatory Authority RA has to work with media and the media
must be included in the Country Emergency Planning Methodology. As to achieve
some results it will a long history to write.
Local
population in case of fixed installation have top priority;
Media is
necessary top priority in general, however it is not enough, it is also
necessary to go to the Greens. Not all of them are against nuclear, however
all of them are in favor of environment.
You have
to open the door for the Greens and as the Media they must be included in the
Country Emergency Planning Methodology.
Regulatory
Authority should study in each region who's who to help to disseminate
information. Goiania prove this. It was a single source the reason of the
worst radiological accident in the world.
Today
International and National Organizations is writing guidance to Public
Communication.
The IAEA
wrote the TECDOC 1076 Communication on Nuclear,
Radiation, Transport and Waste Safety: A Practical Handbook and you
and to those interested can download the text at
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1076_prn.pdf
Now it
is in phase of last review a new TECDOC – Generic procedures for public
information management in a nuclear or radiological emergency, based on in the
TECDOC 953 New Version Updated: Method for the Development of Emergency
Response Preparedness for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency. The Old version
Radsafers still can download it at
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_953_prn.pdf.
Also in
the USA there are many organizations dealing with subject. Recently, last
July, I was invited as IAEA consultant to participate in a Workshop conducting
by the Division of Emergency and Environmental Health Services of the National
Center for Environmental Health (NCEH) to develop a guidance document on Risk
Communication during a Radiological Incident. The Workshop was in Las Vegas
and I believe 3 colleagues of this list were
present.
Finally,
there are many documents and now each country needs to
prepare a project, planning and strategy to implement communications
actions,according with theirs necessities.
. .
.