The content of the main approaches to risk communication is disclosed. In particular, according to the normative approach of risk communication is based on some of the significant ethical criteria and values, focused on ensuring the fundamental rights of civil society, build confidence and consensus. Instrumental approach focuses on the definition of risk communication as a kind of technology that can apply individual, group or organization to obtain advantages in achieving certain goals. Realistic approach considers risk communication as a means (...) of improving the quality of knowledge that is available when making decisions under uncertainty. It is emphasized that realistic imperative may be associated with pragmatic reasons, but it is aimed to achieve this result, which is consistent with common interests and values. Based on the disclosure of the content of these approaches, it is determined that risk communication reflects a certain set of contacts, relationships and actions that arise in society when perceiving risk, assessing it by people, and the need to act to minimize the risk or reduce to an acceptable level the negative consequences of its impact. Determined that risk communication is aimed at addressing the following main objectives: to make the message as accessible to all addressees could understand their meaning; provide an environment for discussion of risk issues involving all stakeholders in the democratic process aimed at resolving conflicts; create conditions in order to convince the message recipients to change their attitude to a particular type of risk. Successful risk communication depends on how the threat was identified for the implementation of communication activities. For this it is necessary to take the following steps: identification of possible collision situations; definition of situations that may trigger conflicts; determining the critical level of perception; determining the ability of information that serves an incentive for certain actions; determining the level of the motivational power of information provided; determining the level of conflict information provided; determining the level of psychological barriers of perception; determination of the ability to hear and understand information; determining the level of preparedness of criticism and black / gray PR; determining readiness to use methods of “pattern disruption”; determining the ability of media to modify and provoke opposing units; determination of a threat of lack of time mode; determining the level of professionalism and training of performers communicative action; determine the feasibility of using adequate methods, techniques, technologies. Demarcation of risk communication with information on risks, communicative risks, crisis communication was carried out. It is shown that risk communication is a purposeful process of exchanging different types of risk between the parties concerned. However this exchange is not one-sided and interactive process based on the existence and performance feedback, ensuring the mutual exchange of information. Proved that risk communication differs from communicative risks that are generated reality of risks intersection varied factors of risks. In contrast, crisis communication, risk communication is establishing a dialogue between those at risk and those who are able to control or reduce their risk level associated with the determination of risk and is intended to convince the public to refrain from risky behavior. It was determined that the combined risk communication objective and subjective elements. (shrink)