Public at Risk or Public As Risk? Managing Environmental Concerns through Risk Governance

Public relations, risk communication and participatory approaches to risk management have emerged as means to handle diverging interests in society; not least public perceptions could be a source of risk in the sense that public perceptions and opinions could pose a threat to the legitimacy and stability of existing ways of managing risk. Thus, risk governance focuses on how organizations deal not only with the technical calculation of risks, but also with the actors they perceive as possible threats and potential risks to the stability of the organization.

This paper analyzes risk governance and the implications of it. The empirical material consists of three interview studies and two studies of public records on how Swedish authorities handled citizens’ and stakeholders’ claim for regulating nature. The analysis finds that the public claims were seen as a particular risk, where public outrage and loss of political legitimacy became part of the risk panorama of the responsible agencies. In particular five mechanisms were used: dissemination of knowledge; naturalization of the problem; development of symbolic action; inclusion of stakeholders; and individualization of responsibility. Through these mechanisms, governmental agencies succeeded to influence stakeholders and citizens understandings and modify their claims. Thus, what took place was not only a process for governing nature, but also for governing people The paper ends by addressing the question whether this conclusion indicates the end of public participation or if it can serve as a trigger for more radical approaches of public participation.