215
procedures. There is however a critique directed towards the RAC system both from
stakeholders themselves (environmental NGOs complain about the power asymmetries that benefi t the fi shing industry) and among scholars. Linke et al. ( 2011 )
suggest that a basic problem with RACs is a mismatch between the participation
purpose (knowledge inclusion) and the stage in the governance process at which
RACs are formally positioned (evaluation of management proposals). Their conclusion is that if the aim is to broaden the knowledge base of fi sheries management,
stakeholders need to be included earlier in the governance process (cf. Linke et al.
2011 ).
9.3.2 Forms and Platforms for Public Risk Communication
As mentioned above, Renn ( 2008 ) identifi es four different forms or kinds of risk
communication: documentation, information , dialogue and involvement. We fi nd
examples of all of these in our cases. In the cases of oil transportation, overfi shing
and eutrophication, communication can be characterised as one way from authorities to a wider public. It appears in the form of information such as statements, press
releases and reports. Two-way communication and dialogue are sometimes established via different projects, which often include organised stakeholders as partners
but not links to the general public. For example, in the case of eutrophication,
research projects such as the Baltic COMPASS (Comprehensive Policy Actions and
Investments in Sustainable Solutions in Agriculture in the Baltic Sea Region) and
Baltic DEAL (Putting Best Practices in Agriculture into Work) involve farmers in
BSR in the research process (see Haahti et al. 2010 ).
There are different media and tools for communication to and with the public, for
example, eco-labels, documents, reports, articles, laws and regulation , meetings and
seminars. Our results point to the preference for using digital media platforms and
webpages. Different actors however use different forms of communication. Whereas
scientists use reports and articles, NGOs focus more on the use of the Internet and
the organisations’ webpages to inform the public. Through these channels, NGOs
provide information , discussion forums and ideas on what the individual citizen can
do to prevent or mitigate Baltic Sea-related problems.
Awareness raising constitutes a key part of HELCOM’s communication policy.
Its website states that ‘An essential objective is to raise general public awareness of
the Baltic Sea and HELCOM actions’ (quoted in Dreyer et al. 2011 ). HELCOM
also uses its website to communicate to a wider audience. Through its website
HELCOM provides a large amount of publicly accessible documentation and information on the fi ve cases. The information formats used, for example, indicator fact
sheets and thematic reports, are primarily produced for targeted users at national
and Baltic-wide levels. The website mainly meets the information needs of those
who already express an interest in marine environmental risk governance. This is
also the case with RACs in the fi sheries case and relates to the question of who is
9 Risk Communication and the Role of the Public: Towards Inclusive Environmental…
procedures. There is however a critique directed towards the RAC system both from
stakeholders themselves (environmental NGOs complain about the power asymmetries that benefi t the fi shing industry) and among scholars. Linke et al. ( 2011 )
suggest that a basic problem with RACs is a mismatch between the participation
purpose (knowledge inclusion) and the stage in the governance process at which
RACs are formally positioned (evaluation of management proposals). Their conclusion is that if the aim is to broaden the knowledge base of fi sheries management,
stakeholders need to be included earlier in the governance process (cf. Linke et al.
2011 ).
9.3.2 Forms and Platforms for Public Risk Communication
As mentioned above, Renn ( 2008 ) identifi es four different forms or kinds of risk
communication: documentation, information , dialogue and involvement. We fi nd
examples of all of these in our cases. In the cases of oil transportation, overfi shing
and eutrophication, communication can be characterised as one way from authorities to a wider public. It appears in the form of information such as statements, press
releases and reports. Two-way communication and dialogue are sometimes established via different projects, which often include organised stakeholders as partners
but not links to the general public. For example, in the case of eutrophication,
research projects such as the Baltic COMPASS (Comprehensive Policy Actions and
Investments in Sustainable Solutions in Agriculture in the Baltic Sea Region) and
Baltic DEAL (Putting Best Practices in Agriculture into Work) involve farmers in
BSR in the research process (see Haahti et al. 2010 ).
There are different media and tools for communication to and with the public, for
example, eco-labels, documents, reports, articles, laws and regulation , meetings and
seminars. Our results point to the preference for using digital media platforms and
webpages. Different actors however use different forms of communication. Whereas
scientists use reports and articles, NGOs focus more on the use of the Internet and
the organisations’ webpages to inform the public. Through these channels, NGOs
provide information , discussion forums and ideas on what the individual citizen can
do to prevent or mitigate Baltic Sea-related problems.
Awareness raising constitutes a key part of HELCOM’s communication policy.
Its website states that ‘An essential objective is to raise general public awareness of
the Baltic Sea and HELCOM actions’ (quoted in Dreyer et al. 2011 ). HELCOM
also uses its website to communicate to a wider audience. Through its website
HELCOM provides a large amount of publicly accessible documentation and information on the fi ve cases. The information formats used, for example, indicator fact
sheets and thematic reports, are primarily produced for targeted users at national
and Baltic-wide levels. The website mainly meets the information needs of those
who already express an interest in marine environmental risk governance. This is
also the case with RACs in the fi sheries case and relates to the question of who is
9 Risk Communication and the Role of the Public: Towards Inclusive Environmental…