Who do Australians trust on 'toxic news'?

State governments and industry need to lift their game if they are to win public trust and support for the clean-up of polluted industrial sites in the local neighbourhood.

A new survey from the Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment (CRC CARE) reveals most Australians are naturally cautious when it comes to believing what they are told by different parties involved in a major clean-up.

The researchers found that the public tends to first learn about local pollution issues from the media, followed by the remediation industry and state governments, but they trust these main sources the least. Community groups and local councils come last as a source of early advice but are considered more trustworthy.

The findings are a wake-up call for state governments and the clean-up industry to communicate better and work at building trust among local communities, says lead author Dr Jason Prior of CRC CARE and the Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) at the University of Technology Sydney.

"The lack of community trust could become a nationwide obstacle to rapid, effective clean-up as Australia grapples with the challenge of cleansing 160,000 potentially contaminated sites," Dr Prior says. "State governments and the clean-up industry must be more honest, clear, open and do what they have promised, rather than just tell people what they think they should hear."

In the study, the CRC CARE researchers aimed to understand which organisations the locals were most likely to trust for information about health and safety issues.

The survey of 800 people living in areas affected by contaminated groundwater, air and soil in New South Wales reveals that 60% of the residents gained their main information from the media, 50% from the clean-up industry, and 17% from local councils.

Most respondents felt that the media and NSW government are driven by other interests when sharing information about local contamination, and this perception distanced them from the local community, says Dr Prior.

"For example, some participants said that the media, in recent years, had prioritised 'sensational' stories about local hazards designed to grab readers' attention, over its obligation to report clearly and accurately the facts about the risks," he says.

"They also thought that state governments tended to prioritised goals such as increasing the state population, or put the interests of business higher than the health and safety of local residents affected by environmental contamination."

Survey respondents also believed that the private industry "does what works for them and not [what is] in the best interest of the community," and that "they have no values in common with the local community, unless it suits them".

On the other hand, they trusted community groups and local government more because they were seen as sharing their own interests and concerns in ensuring that the risks are appropriately dealt with, and would play a 'watchdog' role on behalf of the community.

"Our survey also shows that people who do not trust the information they receive spend a lot of time verifying it, feel anxious and are concerned whether enough is being done to protect them from the toxins," Dr Prior says. "This can lead them to raise obstacles to the process of clean-up, and the lack of trust also causes a significant amount of stress within the community."

He suggests that holding more face-to-face meetings, mediated by trusted sources such as local councils, can reduce this stress.

"Almost all the participants say they have received 'top down' communication – "we tell you what to do and you should go do it"," he says. "They felt that the institutions supplying the information are not interested in their real concerns, so some of this anxiety can be dispelled if they are engaged and heard.

"While the aim is usually to clean up a contaminated area quickly, it's also crucial that the people feel safe, have confidence in the process being used, and feel their concerns are being listened to and addressed."

More information: "'We get the most information from the sources we trust least': residents' perceptions of risk communication on industrial contamination." Australasian Journal of Environmental Management DOI: 10.1080/14486563.2014.954011

Provided by CRC CARE

Citation: Who do Australians trust on 'toxic news'? (2015, April 7) retrieved 19 March 2024 from https://phys.org/news/2015-04-australians-toxic-news.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Explore further

New guide shields Aussies from toxic groundwater, land

23 shares

Feedback to editors