Good and bad examples of siting and building biosafety level 4 laboratories: a study of Winnipeg, Galveston and Etobicoke.
The purpose of this paper is to evaluate successful and unsuccessful examples of siting and building biosafety level 4 (BSL-4) facilities in North America. The paper shows that well thought-out risk communication strategies, that are proactive in nature, are needed to counteract both public trust and negative media amplification. The paper suggests that such strategies, which combine communication tools including media briefings, public fora, focus groups, tours of the proposed facility, open and frequent communication with the public as much as possible do work.
Löfstedt
Ragnar
R
Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH, UK. ragnar.lofstedt@kcl.ac.uk
D003142:Communication; D003159:Community-Institutional Relations; D003264:Containment of Biohazards; D005160:Facility Design and Construction; D017144:Focus Groups; D006801:Humans; D007753:Laboratories / Q000592:standards*; D008402:Mass Media; D009656:North America; D011639:Public Opinion; D018570:Risk Assessment