Science communication in risk management at a high-incidence location for suicide

Abstract

It has been suggested that the role of robust scientific evidence in quality policy development is essential, but can vary on the basis of policy type and setting. These hypotheses and others were explored in a unique local case study dealing with risk management at a high-incidence location for suicide. Specifically, I examined the dynamic factors by which councillors regulated site access for public safety, journalists moderated relevant suicide reporting for public interest, and a science communicator with expertise in psychological medicine advised both groups. Scientific evidence guided public and private negotiations of a problem definition, solution approach, and philosophy of change; and the optimal utility of science in policy was eventually fulfilled in a precautionary suicide prevention approach by councillors and journalists, albeit with different conservative definitions of ‘cost-effective’ risk management. Findings supported an essential but variable role for science in policy – one influenced not only by policy type and setting, but also the management of expectations among decision-makers. Science communicators served as a resource for decision-makers, but ultimately definitions of cost-effective risk management were values-based judgements revealing not all decision-makers’ willingness to reject utilitarianism in the interest of a vulnerable few.