| 英文摘要 |
This project focuses on assisting Toxic and Chemical Substances Bureau (TCSB), EPA to conduct a study on building a risk communication model between TCSB and chemical industry on toxic and highly concerned chemical substances. The object of this project is focused on assessment of a management funding on operation risk, and the best practices of risk communication. The main achievements of the project are as follows: (1) in order to build up risk communication model between TCSB and chemical industry, we compared Taiwan’s toxic and chemical risk management and risk communication system with those in US, Canada, and EU. The results of our present study demonstrate the variations between our models of risk communication with the other three different stakeholders. In addition, four types of communication situations have been adopted and named as "normal risk", "uncertainty risk", "controversial risk", and "crisis situation;" (2) learning communication strategies from setting the “Soil and Groundwater Pollution Control Funds.” The original risk communication proposal has been revised into three steps such as, setting expertise interviews as first step, round table discussion meeting with focus groups, and finally holding expert consultation meetings. Meanwhile, it is crucial to issue questionnaires to chemical industry, to request response about any appropriate approach of risk communication concerning the operation program of the management fund. This study also completed interviews with 16 experts. They have shared quite strong opposition to the fund raising, especially for accident advisory fees, as well as that many other environmental protection funds have been issued. In addition, a total of 327 valid survey questionnaires have been summarized as over 95% of companies support for contingency training courses. It is proposed that the numbers of on-site chemical incidents should be considered as the major cost-basis designed for fund raising from 203 companies. Moreover, four focus-group discussion sessions have been held involving more than 75 experts and two focus group-discussions with more than 26 management agencies, public associations, and industry experts have participated. The objections are even stronger concerning fund-raising from varied environmental protection such as air pollution control, water pollution control, soil and groundwater pollution control, and so on. However, supportive advices on the fund's uses have been highly recommended for the issues such as manpower enhancement, training, and tools for incidents preventions, monitoring and treatments. Finally, to establishing toxic and chemical risk communication best practices model, the first version of “Guideline on Risk for Communication of the Use of Toxic and Chemical Substances” has been compiled as a reference manual of risk communication for TCSB under various risk situation. Four steps in risk communication process are to identify issues, risk communication preparing, to perform communication, and to evaluate risk communication performance. Respectively, individuals and the public, media and stakeholder groups are the three groups for communication objects. We also suggested that it’s crucial to keep momentum about the risk communication with the stakeholders, and to continue to learn the communication skills with the expertise worldwide. A few important issues suggested from this study are, screening different critical communication objects, focusing on the operation of chemical substances in different types of industry, and setting up enterprises contingency team and communication models for small and middle size companies. Based on the different size of enterprises, more round table focus-groups discussions and communication could definitely improve risk communication between government and chemical industry.
|