The evolution of blame and trust: an examination of a Canadian drinking water contamination event

Assigning 'blame' is a normal human reaction when trying to identify who or what was responsible for something going wrong. What was done, by whom, the extent of the damage, combined with the system in place to prevent a reoccurrence can influence short and long-term trust. Studies to date have examined how governments have handled large-scale public health disasters without necessarily taking a close look at the factors leading to blame and the potential role it plays in the loss of trust in government in the affected communities. This study examines the evolution of blame and restoration of trust by the public after a localized public health risk event, the contamination of drinking water supplies by E. coli bacteria in Walkerton, Ontario, Canada in May 2000. Data are drawn from an analysis of national media sources from May 2000 to December 2011 and focus group discussions with members of the general public in 10 select communities in Ontario. An evolution of blame was revealed in the data analysis: over time, members of the public directed blame from a more general scope to specific targets as information became available. Within a relatively short period of time, Walkerton residents appeared to lose trust in both their water supply and those who are supposed to protect it. By contrast, focus group participants had mixed reactions: at a surface level, they expressed a general loss of trust in 'government,' but when probed more deeply, they remained confident in the overall system of regulations to ensure public protection. Nonetheless, Walkerton has served to raise public expectations about food and drinking water issues. 'Walkerton' is frequently invoked when the potential exists for a 'system' failure and public health is put at risk.