The EU Seveso regime in practice

The roles of news media as democratic fora, agenda setters, and strategic instruments in risk governance

“…Thus ripple effects generated by media reports can influence risk governance processes (Renn 2008). Versluis et al (2010) state that attenuation of risk in society may lead to the neglect of risk governance preparedness in the long run. Poumad ere and Mays (2003) describe that after the risk perception about heat waves changed and initiated the social amplification of the risk, risk governance measures were rapidly taken.…”

Electronic Systems of Information Exchange as a Key Tool in EU Health Crisis and Disaster Management

“…116 At the same time, an empirical scrutiny of the ECDC transparency policy, as well as the comparison of EFSA and ECDC, can lead to a conclusion that these are not the sole factors which determine credibility of an expert institution (EU agency) and its networks, but it is also its approach towards uncertainty in risk regulation. 117 EFSA is fully transparent regarding the composition of Panels, experts' CVs, declaration of interests and procedures, while ECDC publishes names of consulted experts in its risk assessments and allows for access to some documents, but does not give access to either the databases with experts' names or lists of members contributing information to its various This information is traditionally perceived as confidential in the area of ECDC work. On the other hand, ECDC is claimed to be very uncertainty-tolerant and it is set as an example of a body providing scientific advice which also outlines uncertainties (for example, ECDC internal operating procedure explicitly specifies that "risk assessment addresses the uncertainties in the assessment (…) through a systematic appraisal of the available evidence"), while EFSA has often been criticised as an uncertainty-intolerant and industry-biased institution.…”

Information, decision and planning support for industrial risk management in India

“…Countries in Europe where industrial developments have long co-existed with densely populated areas, made significant progress in formulating policies, regulations and planning frameworks to deal with the issue of industrial risk. The Seveso Directive in the European Union provides overall guidance to regulate the chemical industry in order to prevent accidents (Versluis et al, 2010). It is a good example of goal-setting regulation and contains general and specific obligations for operators and authorities related to the prevention of major accidents and limitation of their consequences (EC, 1996).…”

“…The last step in the risk management process for industrial hazards comprises of the risk treatment phase. Based on inputs from the risk assessment phase, this phase involves the selection and adoption of risk mitigation measures that aim to reduce residual risk to levels that are acceptable to society (Versluis et al, 2010). Key risk mitigation methods include improvement of plant safety, formulation of emergency preparedness and response plans, adoption of offsite safeguard measures and incorporating risk as a factor for land use planning in industrial areas.…”

“…In continental Europe, where hazardous installations are often located in areas having high population densities, the Seveso II Directive requires that the consequences of industrial accidents be taken into account. This is done through appropriate land use policies and controls when dealing with the planning of new industrial facilities, undertaking modifications to land use around existing ones and new residential developments in the vicinity of hazardous establishments (Porter et al, 1999;Versluis et al, 2010).…”