Reconciling conflicting interpretations of risk: A case study about the siting of a hazardous plant

The introduction of new technology presents many challenges for risk communication. The technology often involves potential hazards and unintended consequences, hence the public must be engaged and consulted. However, this engagement can generate unfounded concerns and unnecessary distress. This paper aims to address how one can achieve the right level of engagement and communicate effectively.

The paper is based on a specific case study, the introduction of hydrogen refuelling in London, and ethnographically observes the social construction of reality that occurs through the interactions in the case.

The paper notes the forms of communication which were constructive, and those that were not and observes how institutional “body‐language” plays a large part in the way interactions are perceived. Symbolic association with wider social concerns appear to distinguish whether people take a strong position, or just let matters take their course.

The papers suggests a refinement of the Social Amplication of Risk Framework.

The analysis suggests how this aspect of community relations can be managed and proposes a communication strategy which focusses on developing a sense of trust and social cohesion. It offers insights into why the public worry about some risks and ignore others.

The research was conducted by participant observation over a period of two years and thus the paper provides a first‐hand insight into how events occurred.