EPA's evolving role - communication is a two-way street.

[Jerry Filbin <filbin.gerald@epa.gov>]

I'm Jerry Filbin and I am the EPA's agencywide coordinator for community-based environmental protection (see http://www.epa.gov/ecocommunity).  A lot of what I do here at EPA headquarters is aimed at helping my counterparts in the EPA Regions and EPA National Programs identify information, tools and resources to help communities. Sometimes I can get a pretty revealing look at how well (or not) communication works when we are assisting in community-based projects.  I think that one of the observations I have is that EPA's view of communication has been evolving since the original public participation policy in 1981.   Almost 20 years ago we had a very one-directional view of communication with the public - or should I say "to" the public! Since then, and particularly in the last 6-7 years we've seen ourselves in a changing role - as no longer an exclusive decision maker, but rather a partner in decision processes that are often local and often more complex because they usually involves more than just single regulatory decisions.  That's meant that we had to learn quickly about communication as a two-way process.  Now, we've become both providers of information and facilitators of an information process at a community level - and that is a role that most of us were not well prepared for.  Some very nice examples of how this worked well come to mind:

 	In Atlanta, EPA played a major role in facilitation of a broad public participation process for the redevelopment of the downtown Atlanta Steel Brownfields site.  The community has a lot of hope that considerable economic revitalization will occur from this innovative residential redevelopment.   But the community had many environmental, economic and quality-of-life concerns.  EPA facilitated hundreds of public meetings that were essential for gathering public input which was a major factor in re-orienting both the environmental assessments and the development plan.

 	In southeastern Florida, EPA worked to provide resources and facilitation support for a public dialogue on redevelopment of the Miami-Dade corridor through a Brownfields program to revitalize the urban areas, create livable communities, and take urban expansion pressure off of neighboring agricultural lands and the everglades.  EPA played a major role in facilitating public dialogue along with state, county and municipal partners.

In the 1990's EPA anticipated the evolution of its role in publications such as ; "Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication" (rule 1 was "Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner" - and rule 3 was "Listen to the Public's specific concerns" ) and in "Principles for Effective Communication With Communities About Ecological Issues" (for copies, see http://www.epa.gov/ecocommunity/bib.htm).   We've also become more aware that the public often has significant information and perspective to bring to the table at every point of a planning or decision process.  The public is often the way we learn about an unregulated or illegal pollution discharge, a pollutant induced fish kill, or a potential cancer cluster for instance.  So, as well as being partners in decisions, the public is often a valuable partner is assessments of environmental and health risks.  Similarly, peer education in formal and informal communication  can be tremendously valuable in informing and shaping public awareness and attitudes.

I think it would be very helpful if we could "hear" from the participants about ideas they may have to help us expand these roles for ourselves - and because they are often on the front line - for our state and tribal agency partners.  I'd also like to hear from participants about ideas they may have about what  EPA might do to promote public participation for risk and other types of environmental assessments and to promote a role for the public itself in informing risk management decision making a the state/tribal, municipal and local level.