Premium
Accountability between Experts and the Public in Times of Risk
Author(s) -
Malet David,
Korbitz Mark
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
australian journal of public administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.524
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1467-8500
pISSN - 0313-6647
DOI - 10.1111/1467-8500.12112
Subject(s) - accountability , functional illiteracy , public relations , minor (academic) , public opinion , risk management , business , perception , risk perception , public service , public health , political science , public administration , psychology , politics , medicine , law , finance , nursing , neuroscience
This article examines the responses of 150 study participants to a simulated bioterrorist attack in Pueblo, Colorado, USA. The study results indicated that, even among members of the public with higher levels of trust in governmental responses, public risk communications indicating minor risk levels would be rejected as insufficient. The data indicates that members of the public seek their own public health information from mass and social media, constraining the ability of emergency management officials to communicate risk levels. Further, it indicates that the public tends to perceive higher risk levels than the evidence warrants, expects service responses in line with their perceptions, and view public officials as not fulfilling their obligations if they respond with less extensive remediation in line with expert opinion. We therefore question whether public pressure on public officials due to scientific illiteracy is contributing to unnecessary costs in disaster management.