Book Review: Art & Science of Managing Public Risks

 

Talking about disaster management

BOOK REVIEW SHIVANAND KANAVI Art and Science of Managing Public Risks Author:V S Ramamurthy, Dinesh K Srivastava, Shailesh Nayak Publisher: World Scientific Publishing Pages: 412 Price: ₹ 4,015 The three authors are senior scientists. Shailesh Nayak is a geologist who was also the secretary of the Department of Earth Sciences and has been deeply involved in India´s Antarctic projects. He played a key role in rolling out, in record time, a Tsunami Warning System for the Indian Ocean Region after the 2004 tsunami. V S Ramamurthy, a nuclear scientist, has had a long innings as secretary, Department of Science and Technology and has grappled with the issue of improving communication between scientists, policy planners, media and the public to promote rational rather than kneejerk solutions to key issues in scientific policy. Dinesh K Srivastava is a distinguished nuclear physicist, former director of the ambitious Variable Energy Cyclotron in Kolkata, and is deeply interested in climate change. Ashutosh Sharma of IIT Kanpur, an Infosys Prize winner in Chemical Sciences and also a former secretary, Department of Science and Technology, has written a scholarly and lyrical preface to the book. When such senior scientists venture into public policy, policymakers would do well to listen carefully. In fact, Art and Science of Managing Public Risks should be made compulsory reading to policymakers and disaster managers. It is perhaps the most exhaustive and comprehensive compendium of disasters of various types. The authors´ concerns range over both natural and manmade disasters. For example, it talks about climate disasters, cyclones, cloudbursts, landslides, flash floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis. It also tackles infectious diseases and epidemics such as plagues, polio, smallpox, malaria, TB, dengue, cholera, and Covid19. In industrial accidents, the book covers coal mine collapses, accidents in oil and gas fields, dam failures, transport and chemical accidents, the Bhopal gas tragedy, harm from pesticides and insecticides. The authors have also dealt with the fact that every technology developed by man so far has pros and cons when the costs and benefits are tallied over the life cycle of the project. So how should policy choices be made and why? How should the risks be communicated to policy makers and communities and through what channels and modus operandi? The authors have taken the same approach in the discussion on nuclear power and safety issues involved and with genetically modified (GM) crops and the fears and upsides, as the transgenic mustard debate has shown in an edible oil hungry India. Then there are developmental issues such as pollution, urban waste management, ewaste, biomedical waste management and so on. The book also discusses the nature of risk communication, dialogue and debate regarding policy choices. The authors conclude that the formulations of government policies are extremely vulnerable to public perceptions. Moreover, risk perceptions are highly individualistic; consequently, risk communication could be complex. The traditional forms of risk communication are often inadequate and ineffective. The authors argue that communication should be in the form of dialogue and not debate and should lead towards a consensus. Importantly, they point out that there is no alternative for governments to taking the public into confidence and empowering them with reliable information. “Humanity has always been vulnerable to a wide spectrum of public risks, such as natural disasters and infectious diseases. The recent developments in science & technology, while providing tools to manage public risks of different kinds, have also broadened the spectrum of public risks that we have to face,” they write. Across the world, they add, “governments as custodians of public good are expected to also hold the responsibility of managing public risks. With more and more countries opting for democratic forms of governance, we also see that formulation of government policies on managing public risks are highly vulnerable to public perceptions.” A classic example of differing risk perceptions from the last three decades is the GM foods. While farmers are eager to benefit from the many advantages of modern biotechnology and move on to Green Revolution 2.0, experts and nongovernmental organisations are divided in their opinions, resulting in the policy becoming a victim of procrastination at great cost to the nation. For example, Bt Cotton and Bt Brinjal have finally entered production legally or illegally; now, there is a prolonged evaluation of Dhara Mustard 11, when we are in dire need of better and more oilseed production. The authors have briefly mentioned the National Disaster Management Act and the agency created to handle disasters in India. One wishes that they had critically examined this law and made recommendations to make it more effective. (The reviewer is adjunct faculty at NIAS, Bengaluru. skanavi@gmail.com )