9.4 Structure of Societal Dialogue
227
In a second step, a common knowledge base needs to be created and shared
among the participants to define issues to discuss. Important is to ensure mutual
respect for the different types of knowledge available, all of which should be
considered. A focus in this step should be placed on searching for and identifying
relevant, critical scenarios that pose a risk. Next, technical options for the management of risks should be defined. This should result in a set of options for all
stakeholders to later consider, and it is followed by calculating the impact potentials
and probabilities of occurrence for each technical option, including calculation of
residual risks. Assessment criteria are then developed to support the evaluation of
the impact potential and probabilities of occurrence.
Finally, all stakeholders need to consider all of this generated information,
discuss potential trade-offs with one another, and arrive at conclusions about the
acceptability of a risk and actions to be taken. These conclusions should then be
communicated to other stakeholders not present during the dialogue.
As mentioned above, there are generally three cases in which risk-benefit
dialogue can be used, and small adjustments might need to be made to the steps
shown in Fig. 9.3 accordingly. These are the normal case, the conflict case, and the
accident case, and each is further introduced in the following sections.
9.4.1 The Normal Case
In the normal case of day-to-day business operations, the generic structure of a riskbenefit dialogue should be used as an ongoing learning and negotiation process. The
goals of such a risk-benefit dialogue include:
• to understand society’s perception of existing benefits and risks, including the
level of objectivity and rationality used
• to exchange factual information and experience about the benefits and risks with
stakeholders
• to clarify the protection goals and the conditions for maintaining acceptance
within society
New products or changes in a company’s operations should initiate a dialogue
with stakeholders to ensure that any societal concerns are understood. Doing this
successfully also depends on both a company’s subject-specific expertise as well as
its credibility. Credibility is earned, for example, through demonstrating:
• Consistency between words and actions
• Honesty, openness, and equality
• Patience and comprehensibility
• Acceptance of other points of view
• Rationality and transparency
Standard tools to help the chemical industry be more transparent, trustworthy,
and understandable to the public and the media include, e.g., publishing annual
227
In a second step, a common knowledge base needs to be created and shared
among the participants to define issues to discuss. Important is to ensure mutual
respect for the different types of knowledge available, all of which should be
considered. A focus in this step should be placed on searching for and identifying
relevant, critical scenarios that pose a risk. Next, technical options for the management of risks should be defined. This should result in a set of options for all
stakeholders to later consider, and it is followed by calculating the impact potentials
and probabilities of occurrence for each technical option, including calculation of
residual risks. Assessment criteria are then developed to support the evaluation of
the impact potential and probabilities of occurrence.
Finally, all stakeholders need to consider all of this generated information,
discuss potential trade-offs with one another, and arrive at conclusions about the
acceptability of a risk and actions to be taken. These conclusions should then be
communicated to other stakeholders not present during the dialogue.
As mentioned above, there are generally three cases in which risk-benefit
dialogue can be used, and small adjustments might need to be made to the steps
shown in Fig. 9.3 accordingly. These are the normal case, the conflict case, and the
accident case, and each is further introduced in the following sections.
9.4.1 The Normal Case
In the normal case of day-to-day business operations, the generic structure of a riskbenefit dialogue should be used as an ongoing learning and negotiation process. The
goals of such a risk-benefit dialogue include:
• to understand society’s perception of existing benefits and risks, including the
level of objectivity and rationality used
• to exchange factual information and experience about the benefits and risks with
stakeholders
• to clarify the protection goals and the conditions for maintaining acceptance
within society
New products or changes in a company’s operations should initiate a dialogue
with stakeholders to ensure that any societal concerns are understood. Doing this
successfully also depends on both a company’s subject-specific expertise as well as
its credibility. Credibility is earned, for example, through demonstrating:
• Consistency between words and actions
• Honesty, openness, and equality
• Patience and comprehensibility
• Acceptance of other points of view
• Rationality and transparency
Standard tools to help the chemical industry be more transparent, trustworthy,
and understandable to the public and the media include, e.g., publishing annual