206
empirical and theoretical knowledge of risk communication and the role of the public, we fi nally suggest some ways for improvement.
Keywords Stakeholder participation • Ecosystem approach to management •
Public involvement • News media • Framing
9.1 Introduction and Background
9.1.1 Background
Trans-boundary environmental risks that affect us all over the globe have raised a
need for new political spaces, political identities and the emergence of a global civil
society (Castells 2008 ). This transformation of society has among other things made
the concept of governance relevant for describing a new situation for dealing with
environmental policies and risks, involving different actors at different levels.
Despite several initiatives to counteract negative trends, it is clear that human activities still cause severe environmental problems and risks which means that structures and processes for environmental governance have to be improved (cf. Gilek
et al. 2011 ). According to Renn ( 2008 ), risk governance consists of four phases:
pre- assessment , appraisal, evaluation and management. Risk communication is in
different ways included in all of these and therefore can be considered as a key
component of risk governance. In this chapter, we focus on institutionalised forms
of risk communication and especially on risk communication with and to the public
with regard to environmental governance of the Baltic Sea.
The implementation of the ecosystem approach to management (EAM) has been
identifi ed as a key means for achieving a healthy marine environment. For example,
in the Baltic Sea region (BSR), environmental risk governance strategies have so far
not been designed to deliver the holistic appraisals and integrated management that
would be required by this approach (Dreyer et al. 2011 ; Hassler et al. 2013 ;
HELCOM 2010 ; McGlade 2010 ). The application of EAM in BSR has been a central pillar of HELCOM’s Baltic Sea Action Plan ( BSAP ) from 2007 (HELCOM
2007 ). EAM is identifi ed as a means to address major pressures affecting the Baltic
Sea marine environment in a more integrated and effective manner (cf. Karlsson
et al. 2011 ). The EU has also endorsed EAM in different directives (Dreyer et al.
2011 ), and previous research has shown that deliberation processes are also vital for
the implementation of it (Dreyer et al. 2014 ).
In this chapter, we discuss forms, opportunities and challenges for risk communication and the role of the public in implementing EAM in environmental and
regional governance, using BSR as a case. Besides being an ecologically and politically highly diverse and important region to study in itself, BSR is held forward as
a pioneer for introducing new forms of environmental governance (cf. Joas et al.
A.M. Jönsson et al.
empirical and theoretical knowledge of risk communication and the role of the public, we fi nally suggest some ways for improvement.
Keywords Stakeholder participation • Ecosystem approach to management •
Public involvement • News media • Framing
9.1 Introduction and Background
9.1.1 Background
Trans-boundary environmental risks that affect us all over the globe have raised a
need for new political spaces, political identities and the emergence of a global civil
society (Castells 2008 ). This transformation of society has among other things made
the concept of governance relevant for describing a new situation for dealing with
environmental policies and risks, involving different actors at different levels.
Despite several initiatives to counteract negative trends, it is clear that human activities still cause severe environmental problems and risks which means that structures and processes for environmental governance have to be improved (cf. Gilek
et al. 2011 ). According to Renn ( 2008 ), risk governance consists of four phases:
pre- assessment , appraisal, evaluation and management. Risk communication is in
different ways included in all of these and therefore can be considered as a key
component of risk governance. In this chapter, we focus on institutionalised forms
of risk communication and especially on risk communication with and to the public
with regard to environmental governance of the Baltic Sea.
The implementation of the ecosystem approach to management (EAM) has been
identifi ed as a key means for achieving a healthy marine environment. For example,
in the Baltic Sea region (BSR), environmental risk governance strategies have so far
not been designed to deliver the holistic appraisals and integrated management that
would be required by this approach (Dreyer et al. 2011 ; Hassler et al. 2013 ;
HELCOM 2010 ; McGlade 2010 ). The application of EAM in BSR has been a central pillar of HELCOM’s Baltic Sea Action Plan ( BSAP ) from 2007 (HELCOM
2007 ). EAM is identifi ed as a means to address major pressures affecting the Baltic
Sea marine environment in a more integrated and effective manner (cf. Karlsson
et al. 2011 ). The EU has also endorsed EAM in different directives (Dreyer et al.
2011 ), and previous research has shown that deliberation processes are also vital for
the implementation of it (Dreyer et al. 2014 ).
In this chapter, we discuss forms, opportunities and challenges for risk communication and the role of the public in implementing EAM in environmental and
regional governance, using BSR as a case. Besides being an ecologically and politically highly diverse and important region to study in itself, BSR is held forward as
a pioneer for introducing new forms of environmental governance (cf. Joas et al.
A.M. Jönsson et al.