The social amplification of risk and tree pests and diseases: key expert risk perceptions and attributions of public concern

Symposium - Risk, flora and fauna: past, present and future In recent years there has been a dramatic increase in new pests and diseases, some of which present a significant risk to tree health, plant biosecurity and... [ view full abstract ]

Symposium - Risk, flora and fauna: past, present and future

In recent years there has been a dramatic increase in new pests and diseases, some of which present a significant risk to tree health, plant biosecurity and ecosystem functions. These outbreaks often involve complex and sometimes contradictory interactions between attempts by governments to manage them, media coverage and the diverse risk perceptions of stakeholders and publics. The difficulty for policymakers is that the technical risk assessment tools and methodologies they rely on to set priorities, recommend and justify preventative actions and target scarce resources may not always be well attuned to often rapidly evolving public risk understandings and the social and cultural processes which shape these. For example, the public and media response following identification of the ash dieback pathogen (Hymenoscyphus fraxineus) in the UK in late 2012 took many by surprise. The resulting social intensification of public risk concern, if sustained, is likely to have profound implications for the way tree pest and disease threats need to be handled and communicated by government, its agencies and stakeholders.

This paper reports on the findings of the first phase of the UNPICK Project (Understanding public risk in relation to tree health). It draws on a documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews with 52 experts and stakeholders associated with three case study outbreaks in the UK: Phythophthora ramorum, oak processionary moth and Chalara ash dieback. The aim was to determine how experts and key stakeholders frame the risks posed by the outbreaks and their perception of public concern, along with how these attributions influence policy and management responses. The research draws on the Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF), which emphasises the socially constructed nature of all risk perceptions and lays stress on the dynamic processes through which risk is communicated and interpreted. By applying the SARF we critically assess how actors frame the risks associated with different outbreaks, the characteristic risk profiles of each of the case study outbreaks as determined by key experts and their attributions of public concern. Finally, the findings are discussed in terms of informing subsequent phases of the project, along with drawing lessons for future risk communication and public engagement strategies.