HAZARD COMMUNICATION REQUIRES KNOWING “WHO” AS WELL AS “HOW”

Geoscientists have an essential role in communicating natural hazard risk to the public, in order to generate timely, effective action. As with the internet use over the past ~ 15 years, excessive focus on the medium may be at the cost of the message itself and who receives it. Informing the public requires replacing largely tacit assumptions with active questions. Who is “the public” and what communities do we need to engage? Who are the best spokespeople to address those communities and what are the most appropriate media? Are we speaking to entire communities or to a subset (e.g., decision-makers)? What hazard are we trying to address and what is the desired outcome? With what daily priorities are we competing? Increasing knowledge and/or awareness (e.g., a specific telephone number), promoting an emergency action (e.g., immediate protective measures in an earthquake), and promoting pre-incident action (e.g., seismic mitigation) require different approaches and expertise. Audience classification is complex but may include age, sex, location, economic status, language(s), and hazard-specific vulnerabilities. Individuals tend to personalize risk, and actual hazard perception (and thus willingness to act) may diverge from expert assessment. Knowledge transfer may be an important outcome, but knowledge without direction toward action may result in a smarter – but not safer – public.