Communicating Uncertainty: Models of Communication and the Role of Science in Assessing Progress towards Environmental Objectives

Abstract

This paper is an exploratory study analysing the communication models underlying Swedish civil servants' and scientists' views of how to communicate uncertainty related to progress towards public environmental quality objectives. Their lines of reasoning are illustrated by quotations from in-depth and focus group interviews. Two communication models are discussed: the separation model, in which experts discuss uncertainties among themselves and subsequently present a clear-cut message to practitioners and politicians, and the integration model, in which policy makers and civil servants take part in discussions about how to interpret and handle the uncertainties involved. The paper identifies the importance of acknowledging the existence of uncertainty and of consciously reflecting on what communication model to use in communicating goal achievement. It also emphasizes the need for further discussion of the consequences of each communication model. Moreover, the paper highlights a need for further research into the sense-making processes occurring as actors in the policy and practitioner arenas interpret expert messages. Finally, it is argued that the integration model for communicating uncertainties could be used to encourage reflection and learning within and across societal sectors.

Keywords:

• Communication
• uncertainty
• management-by-objectives (MBO)

Acknowledgements

A previous version of this paper was presented at the Ninth International Conference on Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST-9) in Seoul, Korea, 16−19 May 2006.

This paper was made possible by a grant from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency for the research program Assessment of Environmental Goal Achievement Under Uncertainty (no. I-37-03). The author wishes to thank Gunilla Öberg and Madelaine Johansson for productive discussion and collaboration throughout the study. Thanks are also extended to Anders Grimvall, Per Milberg, Francis Ries, Sofie Storbjörk, Lars Westerberg, Gunilla Öberg and two anonymous referees for their valuable comments on previous versions of this paper, and to the interviewees for being willing to share their experiences and their views on assessing environmental goal achievement.

Notes

Examples of countries using an MBO system for public environmental management include Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, the UK, Canada, and Australia.

The inclusion of statements about the degree of certainty in the assessment reports has also been discussed by representatives from different county boards, for instance at the annual meeting in 2005 arranged by RUS – the national group for the development of regional indicators (http://www.rus.lst.se/nyheter.html?id=52).