Scientists as Stakeholders in Community Risk Management Decisions: A Problem for Democratic Process. M. A. Kamrin and M. Aronoff, Institute for Environmental Toxicology and Department of Sociology, Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI 48824
Recent reports such as the NRC report, Understanding Risk, and the CRARM report, Framework for Environmental Health Risk Management have proposed changes in the way environmental risk management decisions are made. These reports suggest that such decisions need to be more democratic; i.e., include inputs from multiple stakeholders at all stages of the decision process. A significant element in the proposed changes is the inclusion of scientists in the process as stakeholders. However, the appropriateness and feasibility of this role in risk decisions at the community level needs to be carefully examined. First, in contrast to early suggestions that Love Canal represents the archetypical response to environmental contamination, recent work clearly indicates that local reactions are quite varied. For example, a number of communities react more consensually and rely on well-developed mechanisms for addressing community issues. In such cases, residents might prefer to utilize scientists to provide answers to technical questions or identify relevant scientific resources rather than as stakeholders in the process. Such a role might be more feasible since stakeholder commitments may be very time-consuming and, considering resource limitations, thus limited to a miniscule number of communities. In addition, scientists’ organizational affiliations are likely to impact their roles in the stakeholder negotiation process, and hence the achievement of a more democratic risk management process. Together these factors suggest that democratization of risk management, at least at the community level, may be better accomplished if scientists serve in roles other than stakeholders in the process.
Go to . . .