Journal cover Journal topic
Geoscience Communication An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic
Discussion papers
https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2018-1
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2018-1
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Research article 18 May 2018

Research article | 18 May 2018

Review status
This discussion paper is a preprint. A revision of this manuscript was accepted for the journal Geoscience Communication (GC) and is expected to appear here in due course.

Building bridges between experts and the public: a comparison of two-way communication formats for flooding and air pollution risk

Maria Loroño-Leturiondo1, Paul O'Hare1, Simon J. Cook2, Stephen R. Hoon1, and Sam Illingworth1 Maria Loroño-Leturiondo et al.
  • 1School of Science and the Environment, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, M1 5GD, UK
  • 2Geography, School of Social Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, DD1 4HN, UK

Abstract. Urban centres worldwide are adversely affected by flooding and air pollution. Better prepared citizens are crucial to limiting the impacts of these hazards, and both lay knowledge and personal experiences are important in complementing and challenging expert opinion. For the first time, this study offers a critical comparison of how different two-way communication formats have been used worldwide between experts and the public in relation to flooding and air pollution risk. Through a systematic review, we analyse social media, educational programmes, serious games, citizen science, and forums in terms of their effectiveness in respect of communicating short-term incidents, long-term awareness, and long-term knowledge in the context of flooding and air pollution risk. We find that there is neither a one-size-fits-all, nor superior, format of communication. No single format is effective in fulfilling all three communication purposes. All five formats analysed appear to be successful under different circumstances and are never representative of all segments of the population. Communication between experts and the public is difficult and full of tensions, information alone is not enough. Our study shows different ways of incorporating strategies to build trust between experts and the public and make communication more fun and accessible, breaking down hierarchies and creating safe spaces for co-creation where everyone feels empowered to participate and benefits.

Maria Loroño-Leturiondo et al.
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Maria Loroño-Leturiondo et al.
Maria Loroño-Leturiondo et al.
Viewed  
Total article views: 430 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
318 95 17 430 20 21
  • HTML: 318
  • PDF: 95
  • XML: 17
  • Total: 430
  • BibTeX: 20
  • EndNote: 21
Views and downloads (calculated since 18 May 2018)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 18 May 2018)
Viewed (geographical distribution)  
Total article views: 421 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 409 with geography defined and 12 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Cited  
Saved  
No saved metrics found.
Discussed  
No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 20 Jan 2019
Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation
Share