Can Whistle Blowing Shape Risk Communication?: An Analysis of Organizational Responses and Their Role in Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk in India. A. Susarla, Clark University
Whistle blowing enriches risk communication and present fresh perspective in public domain. On the other hand, in response to whistle blowing, hazard control organizations can choose among multiple pathways. What effect does Whistle-Blowing have on flow of risk information? Review of literature indicates that outcomes to whistle blowing is guided by numerous contingent variables (e.g. bureaucracy in organizations), however complete social process of whistle blowing is yet to be revealed. Further, most literature described examples chosen from settings of first-world countries. This paper presents findings of an in-depth inquiry of blowing the whistle and responses by hazard managers in two events that occurred in India. The selected hazards are the episode of pneumonic plague in Surat City in 1994 and Arsenic pollution of groundwater in West Bengal. Analyses show that whistleblowers and organizations adopted different strategies in each hazard event. The finding denote that the relationship between whistle-blowing initiatives and organizational responses is not to be considered typical but rather depend on diverse locational variables. Further the signal potential of interactions between hazard control organizations and whistleblowers signify strongly in plague-hazard and weakly in arsenic-hazard, thereby intensifying the social amplification and attenuation of risk. I employed qualitative methods to analyze data gathered from public documents, hazard investigation reports, newspapers and interviews with key whistleblowers. Results of this study not only augment theoretical support to risk communication but also stress to policy-makers distinct processes in whistle blowing.
Go to . . .
2000 SRA Annual Meeting Table of Contents
2000 SRA Annual Meeting Author Index
Main Abstracts Menu Page
RiskWorld Home Page