EMF Health Risk Perception. The Effect of Risk Communication in its Political Context

 

Research on risk communication shows that it can increase or decrease peoples’ worries. Several studies, also on EMF risk communication document a negative effect, while studies on otherissues show that being informed alleviates anxieties. It is not yet known under which conditions risk communication has a negative or positive effect. Our basic hypothesis is that the effect of EMF risk communication depends on the political context. We therefore propose a study in which we compare three different political risk communication approaches: the standard Dutch approach, an (experimental) optimized Dutch approach and the standard Swiss approach. These three approaches vary in the EMF health risk discourse and in the the degree of political control. In our hypothesis, the policy discourse on EMF and Health is one of the main shaping factors of risk perception. Particularly, if people experience a lack of political power, this increases the likelihood of negative effects. The Dutch approaches is marked by limited political power, while in Switzerland citizens have more political power In the optimized Dutch procedure, the political process will be tailored to give people maximum influence. Our prediction is that this will lead to a decrease in worry. The effects of the policy discourse are not static, but develop over time and in interaction between policy makers and citizens. Therefore we propose to research the effect of the political context by means of a comparative panel study. If the policy discourse is of importance, we have to vary the policy to see its effect. The research is therefore conducted in Switzerland and in the Netherlands. Both countries differ with respect to the EMF and Health policy. In each case, a panel of 50 people is followed for one year: before, during and after being informed about the siting of a mobile phone mast and possible health risks. We include a representative sample of the people addressed in a specific communication event. Psychometric surveys are used to assess changes in EMF risk perception. Qualitative interviews and participation in communication events are used to assess peoples’ frame of mind and their relation to the policy discourse. Once we have an understanding of peoples frame of mind this can be also be assessed quantitatively using q-methodology (Brown, 1980; Kroesen & Bröer, 2009; Van Exel, 2005)). This way, we combine the comparability of quantitative measures with the in-depth information of qualitative measures. The rising fear of health effects of a new technology might be triggered by the way masts are communicated to citizens. This is not meant to say that electromagnetic fields of mobile phone technology have no health effects. The verdict about this question is not out. In the meantime, the way this uncertainty is communicated increases or decreases people’s fears. Since we employ qualitative and quantitative methods, we can assess possible changes in politics – which might result from changes in scientific consensus on EMF and health. The research will be conducted by a PhD, the two main applicants and a student assistant. The setup is comparable to earlier research of Bröer in Switzerland and the Netherlands. We propose to employ the PhD part time. The first year is used to start the project and prepare the fieldwork. In this year we will write an article on risk communication and politics on a theoretical level. Year 2 and 3 and the second half of year 4 are used for data collection. In the same period, an article is written on mixed methods in risk research. Year 4 is reserved for data processing (transcribing interviews) and analysis. Here we start writing articles on the field-data. Analysis and writing continues in year 5, together with recommendations for health risk communication, a report for ZonMw and publications for the general public. The thesis is finalized and defended at the end of year 5. There are two major gains in this project. First, it will provide recommendations how to communicate about EMF and health, including an outline for an optimal approach. Second, the results contribute to risk theory and particularly the pertinent question where peoples’ worries come from.