當今高科技發展牽涉複雜的專業知識，公部門在執行高科技發展政策常常要與地方民眾進行風險溝通。正因為牽涉的知識層面相當複雜，不同行動者對於高科技的風險認知也有相當差異，爭議因而產生。本文即在這樣的脈絡下，分析竹科宜蘭園區設置案例。首先透過中央與地方行政部門、地方居民與在地團體的深度訪談、地方的環評說明會與竹科宜蘭基地公民會議的參與觀察，分析不同行動者的風險認知及其所反映之價值，以了解不同行動者風險認知的差異；其次分析比較自救會的社會抗爭、環評說明會與公民會議三個場域在風險溝通上的差異，呈顯出制度內的公民參與機制尚未能妥善處理風險認知歧異所產生之社會抗爭，以及政府處理環境科技風險議題的盲點。雖然民眾參與管道增多，但並無促進實質溝通。最後，本文指出目前政策機制缺乏風險處理的敏感度，而審議式民主著重提供充分資訊以及理性審議，促成不同行動者間風險認知的對話，增加公共政策民主參與的實質內涵，指出了制度改善的一條途徑。

Public participation and risk communication have become important components in environmental decision-making processes. However, public opposition and mistrust during risk communication often cripple policy-making processes. This case study examines risk communications on high-tech environmental controversies in three public forums (an Environmental Impact Assessment public hearing, a social protest, and a citizens' conference). This paper argues that policy-makers' technocratic tendency prevents them from communicating effectively with the public about environmental risk. Although avenues of public participation have increased, risk communication has not really improved, and the current policy-making mechanism addresses the issue of risk management insufficiently and lacks a design for better communication. This paper concludes that deliberative democracy may provide a better way to facilitate public communication of risk and thus improve the quality of public discussions and policy decision-making processes.