IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v20y2017i4p533-550.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk communication policy design: Cyprus compared to France and the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • Sophie Tourenq
  • George Boustras
  • Jan M. Gutteling

Abstract

This study aims at analyzing differences between risk communication policies in Cyprus, compared to the Netherlands, and France. It analyzes risk communication policies indirectly through a qualitative analysis of the information provided by official websites, which are considered to be proxies of these policies. The websites review will focus on the type of the information disclosed online, and the similarities and differences between the websites, regarding the information provided, the way it is communicated, the backing on credible sources, and the supplying of more information if desired, but also simply through the presenting of the WebPages. The results indicate that the Netherlands and France have created risk dedicated websites besides the ministries’ websites with information on risks, prevention and the authorities’ actions. There is a gap between strategies. The Dutch strategy is to give more responsibilities to the public, by encouraging individuals to be resilient and responsible for their own safety at a certain level by promoting preventive behaviors. The French strategy is to provide risk-dedicated information to the public, also on prevention and government actions. Opposed to this, the Cypriot authorities simply avoid this strategic question by confining the risk communication to the crisis phase, without entrusting people with a role in risk management, and by strictly one-directional communication, with government delivering and the public digesting (or not). Suggestions for risk communication policy development are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Sophie Tourenq & George Boustras & Jan M. Gutteling, 2017. "Risk communication policy design: Cyprus compared to France and the Netherlands," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 533-550, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:20:y:2017:i:4:p:533-550
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2015.1100656
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2015.1100656
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2015.1100656?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Slovic, 1999. "Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk‐Assessment Battlefield," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 689-701, August.
    2. Milou Kievik & Jan Gutteling, 2011. "Yes, we can: motivate Dutch citizens to engage in self-protective behavior with regard to flood risks," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 59(3), pages 1475-1490, December.
    3. Milou Kievik & Ellen F.J. ter Huurne & Jan M. Gutteling, 2012. "The action suited to the word? Use of the framework of risk information seeking to understand risk-related behaviors," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 131-147, February.
    4. Ellen Ter Huurne & Jan Gutteling, 2008. "Information needs and risk perception as predictors of risk information seeking," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(7), pages 847-862, October.
    5. Ellen F. J. ter Huurne & Jan M. Gutteling, 2009. "How to trust? The importance of self-efficacy and social trust in public responses to industrial risks," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(6), pages 809-824, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jan M. Gutteling & Peter W. de Vries, 2017. "Determinants of Seeking and Avoiding Risk‐Related Information in Times of Crisis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 27-39, January.
    2. Wim Kellens & Ruud Zaalberg & Philippe De Maeyer, 2012. "The Informed Society: An Analysis of the Public's Information‐Seeking Behavior Regarding Coastal Flood Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1369-1381, August.
    3. Jia Shi & Xiangnan Hu & Xuesong Guo & Cuihong Lian, 2020. "Risk Information Seeking Behavior in Disaster Resettlement: A Case Study of Ankang City, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-19, October.
    4. T. Terpstra & R. Zaalberg & J. de Boer & W. J. W. Botzen, 2014. "You Have Been Framed! How Antecedents of Information Need Mediate the Effects of Risk Communication Messages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(8), pages 1506-1520, August.
    5. Anita Cremers & Hester Stubbé & Dolf van der Beek & Maaike Roelofs & José Kerstholt, 2015. "Does playing the serious game B-SaFe! make citizens more aware of man-made and natural risks in their environment?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(10), pages 1280-1292, November.
    6. Emma Soane & Iljana Schubert & Simon Pollard & Sophie Rocks & Edgar Black, 2016. "Confluence and Contours: Reflexive Management of Environmental Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(6), pages 1090-1107, June.
    7. Shasha Li & Guofang Zhai & Shutian Zhou & Chenjing Fan & Yunqing Wu & Chongqiang Ren, 2017. "Insight into the Earthquake Risk Information Seeking Behavior of the Victims: Evidence from Songyuan, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, March.
    8. Michelle McDowell & Thorsten Pachur, 2020. "Availability, Affect, and Decisions to Seek Information about Cancer Risks," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(8), pages 941-945, November.
    9. Melanie De Vocht & An-Sofie Claeys & Verolien Cauberghe & Mieke Uyttendaele & Benedikt Sas, 2016. "Won’t we scare them? The impact of communicating uncontrollable risks on the public’s perception," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 316-330, March.
    10. Jiuchang Wei & Ming Zhao & Fei Wang & Peng Cheng & Dingtao Zhao, 2016. "An Empirical Study of the Volkswagen Crisis in China: Customers’ Information Processing and Behavioral Intentions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 114-129, January.
    11. Milou Kievik & Ellen F.J. ter Huurne & Jan M. Gutteling, 2012. "The action suited to the word? Use of the framework of risk information seeking to understand risk-related behaviors," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 131-147, February.
    12. Carolyn A. Lin, 2023. "Flood Risk Management via Risk Communication, Cognitive Appraisal, Collective Efficacy, and Community Action," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-18, September.
    13. Victor Matanggaran & Jan M. Gutteling, 2021. "Explaining Risk Perception of Climate Change in Indonesia through Cultural Dimension of Uncertainty Avoidance, Collectivistic, and Long-term Orientation," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 5(5), pages 336-345, May.
    14. Roxanne E. Lewis & Michael G. Tyshenko, 2009. "The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 714-728, May.
    15. Ling Jia & Queena K. Qian & Frits Meijer & Henk Visscher, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perception: A Perspective for Proactive Risk Management in Residential Building Energy Retrofits in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    16. Paschalis Arvanitidis & Athina Economou & Christos Kollias, 2016. "Terrorism’s effects on social capital in European countries," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 231-250, December.
    17. Femke Hilverda & Margôt Kuttschreuter, 2018. "Online Information Sharing About Risks: The Case of Organic Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1904-1920, September.
    18. Hang Lu & APPC 2018–2019 ASK Group & Kenneth Winneg & Kathleen Hall Jamieson & Dolores Albarracín, 2020. "Intentions to Seek Information About the Influenza Vaccine: The Role of Informational Subjective Norms, Anticipated and Experienced Affect, and Information Insufficiency Among Vaccinated and Unvaccina," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2040-2056, October.
    19. Wang, Fei & Yuan, Yu & Lu, Liangdong, 2021. "Dynamical prediction model of consumers’ purchase intentions regarding anti-smog products during smog risk: Taking the information flow perspective," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 563(C).
    20. Ma, Jie & Tse, Ying Kei & Wang, Xiaojun & Zhang, Minhao, 2019. "Examining customer perception and behaviour through social media research – An empirical study of the United Airlines overbooking crisis," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 192-205.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:20:y:2017:i:4:p:533-550. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.