This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Communication des risques industriels au public - Les expériences aux États-Unis et en France

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Nathalie de Marcellis-Warin ()
Ingrid Peignier ()
Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné ()

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In many domains, opinion plays a very significant role which will not stop growing. It is true more than ever in the environmental and health domains, but also in industrial risks. Is it necessary to worry about it? Won't today's mindset become tomorrow's regulation?
We show the characteristics of the communication of industrial risks, then we analyze several models illustrating the current regulations that govern information to the public, the various means of communicating, the conveyed messages, their useful contributions and their limits, in particular in the United States and in France.
First of all, we describe general notions of the communication of industrial risks. We highlight how the communication of risks to stakeholders is an important part of each step in the risk management decision process.
In a second part, we study the American experience. We focus on the information that is actually transmitted to citizens and on the transmission resources used. We examine more closely the example of "Local Emergency Planning Committees" (LEPCs), which are very significant entities, pivotal in the formal link between citizens, the industry and the government.
In a third part, we examine the administrative responsibilities of the various actors implicated in the industrial risk management in France. We consider the questions of communication, namely which are the general principles of the communication, which is the information actually transmitted to the citizens, which are the means set up to enhance the public participation. Concerning this last point, we describe in more details the example of a local commission of information in the town of Strasbourg (East of France). To conclude, we will also examine how the new French bill approved by the Senate on February 6th 2003 relating to the prevention of technological and natural hazards and compensation for damages will require the creation of mandatory local commissions of information and discussion (CLIC) around each site at risk. These committees will address all questions concerning the risks, in view of improving the information and discussion about these risks, and the means of preventing them.

Dans de nombreux domaines, l'opinion joue un très grand rôle qui ne cessera de grandir. C'est surtout vrai dans les domaines de l'environnement et de la santé, et plus encore dans celui des risques industriels. Faut-il s'en préoccuper, s'en inquiéter ? L'opinion d'aujourd'hui n'est-elle pas la réglementation de demain ?
Nous montrons les caractéristiques de la communication des risques industriels puis analysons plusieurs expériences illustrant les réglementations en vigueur sur l'information du public, les divers moyens de communiquer, les messages véhiculés, leurs apports bénéfiques et leurs limites, en particulier aux États-Unis et en France.
Dans une première partie, nous abordons des notions générales de la communication des risques industriels. Nous montrons comment la communication fait partie intégrante de toutes les étapes de la gestion du risque.
Dans une deuxième partie, nous étudions l'expérience américaine en matière de communication des risques industriels. Nous regardons quelle est l'information qui est effectivement transmise aux citoyens et enfin, nous recensons les moyens de transmission utilisés. Nous examinons de plus près l'exemple des « Local Emergency Planning Commitees » (LEPCs), entité très importante, pivot entre les citoyens, l'industrie et le gouvernement.
Dans une troisième partie, nous étudions les responsabilités administratives des différents acteurs impliqués dans la gestion des risques industriels en France. Nous nous penchons sur les questions de communication, à savoir quels sont les principes généraux de communication, quelle est l'information effectivement transmise aux citoyens, quels sont les moyens mis en place pour favoriser la participation du public. Concernant ce dernier point, nous décrivons plus en détail l'exemple d'un comité d'information de la ville de Strasbourg (Est de la France). En conclusion, nous verrons également comment le nouveau projet de loi français relatif à la prévention des risques technologiques et naturels et à la réparation des dommages, voté par le Sénat le 6 février 2003, permettra la création obligatoire de commissions locales d'information et de concertation (CLIC) autour de chaque site à risque. Ces comités seront saisis de toutes questions relatives aux risques en vue d'améliorer l'information et la concertation sur ces risques, et les moyens de les prévenir.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cirano.qc.ca/pdf/publication/2003RP-02.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by CIRANO in its series CIRANO Project Reports with number 2003rp-02.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 01 Mar 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cir:cirpro:2003rp-02

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 2020 rue University, 25e �tage, Montr�al, Qu�c, H3A 2A5
Phone: (514) 985-4000
Fax: (514) 985-4039
Email:
Web page: http://www.cirano.qc.ca/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Webmaster).

Related research
Keywords: Chemical plant safety; Community participation; communication of industrial risk; US Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA); Risk Management Program (RMP); Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs); SEVESO Directive; Local Commissions of Information and discussion (CLIC); Sûreté des usines chimiques; participation du public; communication des risques industriels; US Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA); Risk Management Program (RMP); Comités locaux de planification d'urgence (LEPC); Directive SEVESO; Commissions Locales d'Information et de Concertation (CLIC);

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. Konar, Shameek & Cohen, Mark A., 1997. "Information As Regulation: The Effect of Community Right to Know Laws on Toxic Emissions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 109-124, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Beierle, Thomas, 2000. "The Quality of Stakeholder-Based Decisions: Lessons from the Case Study Record," Discussion Papers dp-00-56, Resources For the Future. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Data contributors to RePEc receive monthly emails with details about downloads and abstract views of their works.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-22.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.