Health for all by the year 2000 is the blueprint for change agreed to by the Member States of the World Health Organization. In Europe, this blueprint is built on 38 regional targets, many of which have the underlying aim of uncovering new knowledge and of using existing knowledge more effectively. The targets related to a healthy environment have the ultimate goals of safeguarding human health against environmental hazards, and of enhancing the quality of life by providing clean and safe water, air, food, and working and living conditions. Allied to these goals is the need to reduce the sense of jeopardy that many people feel about what they perceive as 'the risks of everyday life'. These goals are an integral part of the European Charter on Environment and Health, adopted by 29 European Member States and the Commission of the European Communities in December 1989. The Charter stresses the shared responsibility of everyone to protect the environment, to be given adequate and accurate information, and to be involved in decision-making. It outUnes the principles for public policy as well as what needs to be done to transform them into action. In this, strong information systems have a vital role to play by helping to monitor the effectiveness of measures taken, of trends analysed, of priorities set and of decisions made.

Accurate assessment of environmental hazards and related risks is a primary prerequisite for effective environmental health protection, at both the individual and collective level. National and regional policies on environmental health need to be guided by knowledge about the risks to the populations involved; as the Environmental Action Plan for Europe notes, 'priority setting requires the comparative assessment of risks to health of different environmental factors against the cost of controlling them.' In recent years this has assumed particular importance, for with the encouragement of the World Health Organisation (WHO), all countries in Europe are committed to producing National Environmental Health Action Plans (NEHAPs), which will define priorities and targets for environmental health and the actions needed to achieve them. Reliable information on risks is clearly fundamantal to this process. Individual risk assessment is no less important in this context. Much of the responsibility and capacity to improve public health lies ultimately in the choices (e.g. about diet, smoking, alcohol consumption, sexual activities, sporting activities, travel mode, place of residence and occupation) which we make as individuals. If we are to improve and protect our own health, therefore, and in so doing play our personal role in achieving the targets set by these Plans, we need to be guided by a clear understanding of the risks involved.

Accurate assessment of environmental hazards and related risks is a primary prerequisite for effective environmental health protection, at both the individual and collective level. National and regional policies on environmental health need to be guided by knowledge about the risks to the populations involved; as the Environmental Action Plan for Europe notes, 'priority setting requires the comparative assessment of risks to health of different environmental factors against the cost of controlling them.' In recent years this has assumed particular importance, for with the encouragement of the World Health Organisation (WHO), all countries in Europe are committed to producing National Environmental Health Action Plans (NEHAPs), which will define priorities and targets for environmental health and the actions needed to achieve them. Reliable information on risks is clearly fundamantal to this process. Individual risk assessment is no less important in this context. Much of the responsibility and capacity to improve public health lies ultimately in the choices (e.g. about diet, smoking, alcohol consumption, sexual activities, sporting activities, travel mode, place of residence and occupation) which we make as individuals. If we are to improve and protect our own health, therefore, and in so doing play our personal role in achieving the targets set by these Plans, we need to be guided by a clear understanding of the risks involved.

Public experience with risk communication differs greatly from country to country in Europe and there has been little opportunity for the transfer of experience and learning between countries. This is especially true for the many new European States, including the countries in transition from centralised to market economies. This book presents case studies on risk communication. One of its unifying concepts is the role of risk communication in the risk management process. Technical and philosophical introductions to risk communication and risk management and research in risk communication are given. The case studies themselves occupy the central portion of the book, each one covering a particular hazard, risk or situation seen from a particular point of view. The issue of the special circumstances for environmental and health risk communication in central and eastern Europe is also addressed through a separate presentation and discussion of an appropriate case study. A different approach to risk communication is taken by examining how it forms part of the risk management process at the local level. Research into risk perception, a field that forms an important foundation for many aspects of risk communication, is summarised and practical guidelines for risk communication are reviewed. These include discussions on how to carry out public information programmes and methods for increasing public involvement in risk management decisions.