Organizing to Confront Terrorism:
The Role of Risk Communication
George Gray
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Harvard School of Public Health
Overview
] The Health Risks of Fear
] Risk Perception
] Toward Better Communication
\ Sound risk analysis
\ Commitment to communication
\ Organizing for better analysis and
communication
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
The “Terror” in Terrorism
] Actions of terrorists are as much about creating
widespread fear as about causing physical damage
] Terror defined as “intense, overpowering fear*” suggests
that response may be greater than warranted by actual
risk
* The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
The Health Risks of Fear
] Efforts to confront fear may lead to actions
that increase risk
] Fear and anxiety may have direct risks to
health
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Making Things Worse?
] Post September 11 saw drop in air travel and increase
in highway travel - highway travel is riskier
] Increase in gun sales in October, 2001 (background
checks up 39 percent from October, 2000) - guns
purchased for self-protection far more likely to be used
in suicide, crime or to harm someone accidentally than
to be used for self defense*
] Prophylactic use of “Cipro” by perhaps millions of
Americans# - increasing antibiotic resistance?
•A.L. Kellerman, G. Somes, F.P. Rivera, R.K. Lee, and J.G. Benton,“Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms
in the Home,” Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection, and Critical Care 25, no. 2 (1998):263-267
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
•# R. Blendon, J. Benson, C. DesRoches, C. and M. Herrmann, “Harvard School of Public Health/Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation Survey Project on Americans’ Response to Biological Terrorism,” International
Communications Research 10/24-28
Fear and Health
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Why We Fear What We Fear
] Long history of research in risk perception with key work
by Paul Slovic, Baruch Fischoff, Amos Tversky and
many others
] Efforts to identify “triggers” that increase or decrease
fears of particular risks
] Helps identify why sometimes our fears don’t match the
facts
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Risk Perception Factors
Increase Perceived Risk
Decrease Perceived Risk
Control
Lack of Control
Choose risk
Don’t choose risk
Natural
Man-made
New risk
Familiar risk
Potentially catastrophic
Not catastrophic
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Risk Perception Factors
Increase Perceived Risk
Decrease Perceived Risk
Could affect me
Happens to others
Known to science
Very uncertain
Trust in organization
creating, controlling or
communicating about the
risk
Lack of trust in
organization creating,
controlling or
communicating about the
risk
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
The Importance of Trust
] Trust in institutions managing risks decreases fears
] Information from trusted sources is more likely to be
used appropriately
] Trust is built by actions and words
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Trust and Bioterrorism
] Great public anxiety during anthrax episode meant
communicating about the risks was key
] October 2001 poll asked who would be trusted as
source of information:
\ Centers for Disease Control - 48%
\ Secretary of HHS
- 38%
\ Director of FBI
- 33%
] Most communication by HHS, FBI and Attorney General
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Toward Better Communication
] Need sound risk analysis
\ Communication can’t be pandering to emotions
\ Need to understand sources and size of risks
\ Helps set priorities for actions and communication
] Challenges
\ Terrorism risks difficult to assess
\ Intelligent adversary confounds risk management
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Toward Better Communication
] A commitment to communication
\ Make communication ongoing part of policy at the highest levels
[ Build trust for future
[ Plan communications for situations
\ Consider the risk communication implications of specific actions
(or inaction)
] Challenges
\ Risk management decisions are already difficult
[ Decisions require balancing costs, benefits and other factors
[ Communications needs compete with analyses, politics,
public pressures and resource constraints
\ Be realistic about what can be achieved - help people
understand the facts rather than acting like they “should”
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
An Example: “Dirty” Bombs
] On June 10, 2002 it was announced that Abdullah Al Muhajir had been
arrested and was suspected of planning to detonate a “dirty” bomb
containing radioactive material along with conventional explosives
] Think about risk perception and communication
\ The way this is communicated will influence public reaction to this
event and to the actual use of dirty bomb if it ever occurs
\ Risk perception research tells us that several key “fear buttons” will
be pushed by this topic, mostly because radiation is involved
[ New risk
[ Man-made
[ Uncertain
[ Hard to understand
[ Potentially catastrophic
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Risk Communication and “Dirty
Bombs”
Attorney General John Ashcroft - Moscow, June 10, 2002
“In apprehending al Muhajir as he sought entry into the United States, we have
disrupted an unfolding terrorist plot to attack the United States by exploding a
radioactive "dirty bomb." Now, a radioactive "dirty bomb" involves exploding a
conventional bomb that not only kills victims in the immediate vicinity, but
also spreads radioactive material that is highly toxic to humans and can
cause mass death and injury.
News media coverage - USA Today June 11, 2002
] "The truth is, you have to start with a boatload of radioactive material in a dirty
bomb for the health risk to the population to be significant," says Jonathan Links of
the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in Baltimore, a past head of the Society
of Nuclear Medicine. "The real threat of a dirty bomb is psychological.”
] In terms of immediate casualties, a dirty bomb is "more on par with a natural
catastrophe, a bad fire," says Bruce Blair, president of the Center for Defense
Information. …. But Blair and others warn that even a low-tech dirty bomb using
small amounts of dynamite and radioactive material probably would accomplish
one of the chief goals of terrorism — creating widespread fear and panic
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Dirty Bombs - What Do We Learn
] First Government communications pushed “fear buttons”
] News media did a very good job of conveying
information to put fears in perspective
\ Used trusted experts
\ Used perception factors - compare to known risks
\ Recognized the role of fear
] Overall, a communication success but Government
missed chance to build trust for future
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Organizing for Risk Analysis
and Communication
] Opportunity with Department of Homeland Security
] Communication expertise in many agencies and
departmental functions being incorporated into the
Department of Homeland Security
] Several opportunities within the Homeland Security Act
of 2002
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
The Importance of Communication
] Sound risk communication is clear to the central mission of
the Department of Homeland Security:
(b)(1) The primary mission of the Department is to—
(A) prevent terrorist attacks within the United States;
(B) reduce the vulnerability of the United States to terrorism;
and
(C) minimize the damage, and assist in the recovery, from
terrorist attacks that do occur within the United States.
] Risk communication should be a central tool for achieving the
goals within the Department of Homeland Security
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
The Need for Sound Analysis
] Many potential threats of different likelihoods and consequences mean
priorities must be set
] Risk analysis can be used to rank risks and focus resources
] For example, under Section 301 of the HAS:
In assisting the Secretary with the responsibilities specified in section
101(b)(2)(B), the primary responsibilities of the Under Secretary for
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures
shall include— …..
(3) establishing priorities for, directing, funding, and conducting
national research, development, and procurement of technology
and systems—
(A) for preventing the importation of chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear, and related weapons and material; and
(B) for detecting, preventing, protecting against, and responding
to terrorist attacks that involve such weapons or material
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Summary
] In organizing to confront terrorism, we must emphasize
risk analysis and communication
] Risk analysis can help identify and characterize threats
and prioritize responses
] Risk communication is key to reducing the terror in
terrorism - requires a commitment to communication at
all levels of the Department of Homeland Security
Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
Thank You!