Tools to support risk-benefit communication
Creators: name: European Food Safety Authority
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2024
Subjects: Risk Benefit Communication
Risk Benefit Perceptions
Risk Governance

description: EFSA’s approach to risk communication planning and strategy development (Vrbos et al., 2023), follow the structure of the International Risk Governance Center (IRGC) conceptual framework for understanding risk governance (Florin and Bürkler, 2017; Florin and Parker, 2020). The IRGC framework covers the entire risk analysis process and includes various steps and cross-sectional aspects: 






Pre-assessment covers the identification and framing of the problem;

Appraisal concerns the assessment of the technical and perceived causes and consequences of the risk-benefit;

Characterisation and evaluation refer to making a judgment about the risk-benefit and the need to manage it;

Management indicates the process of deciding on and implementing risk management options. 





Given EFSA’s remit as food safety risk assessor, the available tools cover the first two steps only. (N.B. The tools described below are available here on Zenodo for testing in preparation for future requests for risk benefit assessments that EFSA may receive. They form part of proposed guidance on risk benefit communication included in the EFSA Scientific Committee draft “Guidance on Risk-Benefit Assessment of foods, Update” issued for public consultation on XX February 2024.) 




F.5.1 Pre-assessment 




This first phase aims at identifying the diverse views and interest in relation to a risk benefit question and the issues that need to be covered. It serves as a frame for how to assess, manage and communicate.  




Within this crucial step of problem framing, three areas should be taken into account for communication planning: i) the nature of the topic; ii) knowledge and perceptions; and iii) institutional and stakeholder interest. EFSA developed a checklist of yes/no questions linked to a decision tree for the evaluation of risk assessment questions (Vrbos et al., 2023). This has been adapted for risk benefit analysis, in particular, to understand if the risks/benefits are related to similar/unrelated health effects, who is affected and what is known about the perceptions of the potential risks and benefits.   




F.5.2 Appraisal – concern assessment 




According to the IRGC framework, the concern assessment should examine i) stakeholders’ opinions, values, and concerns about the risk; ii) cognitive heuristics and biases that play a role; iii) potential constraints; iv) social reaction to the risk; v) role of institutions and media in tackling public concern; vi) possible controversies and conflicts (Florin and Bürkler, 2017). 




Using social research data, complemented by media and social media listening, allows one to map the volume and sentiment of public discourse on a topic (see Vrbos et al., 2023). These methods support the identification of the perceived characteristics of the information source, as they provide data on, e.g., what are the most used and most trusted information sources about the topic. Once all these data are gathered, a value of concern is calculated based on the public’s knowledge and perception of the topic. While the original model explained in Vrbos et al. (2023) considers only risk perception, a modified version of the concern assessment that considers benefit perception is proposed. This includes the factors that can influence risk and benefit perceptions, indicated above, and the characterisation of the trade-offs faced by consumers.  




Florin, M V and Bürkler, M T, 2017. Introduction to the IRGC risk governance framework (No. REP_WORK). EPFL. 




Vrbos, D, Zamariola, G, Maxim, L, Nicolini, G, Ortega, P, Ramsay, J, Rasche, M, Rogers, C, Schombert, L, Smith, A, and Gallani, B, 2023. Societal insights in risk communication planning–a structured approach. Journal of Risk Research, pp.1-14. 
description: EU; pdf; socialscience@efsa.europa.eu