Communication and engagement encompasses a spectrum of activities, from linear information transfer through to interactive dialogue with audiences and communities. In recent years there has been an increasing recognition of the need to acknowledge and engage with a variety of defensible views on risk. This has contributed to a progressive shift – both in the research literature and in practice – from an original emphasis on “public mis-perceptions of risk” (which tended to treat deviations from expert estimates as products of ignorance or irrationality), towards partnership-based approaches that treat risk communication as a two-way process in which both “expert” and “lay” perspectives inform each other.
This trajectory closely parallels the evolution described in the Communicating for change page. The two sit alongside each other here because they share common ground around trust, context, and the recognition that how people interpret and act on information is shaped by far more than the information itself.
The resources below are drawn from across the risk communication and engagement spectrum. They range from practical guidance on communicating in the face of epidemics and natural hazards, through to foundational work on how risk perception is shaped by social context, experience, and the quality of relationships between those communicating and those affected.
Foundational work
Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process
This 1995 paper by Baruch Fischhoff’s reviews the previous twenty years of process in risk communication research and practice, and is an interesting place to start from. His review is organized within seven developmental stages that span the 20 year period from 1975 to 1995. These progressively move from “All we have to do is get the numbers right” through to an appreciation that “All we (really) have to do is make them partners” in the discussion. Many of the more recent papers above look at how this last stage can begin to be achieved …..
Communicating about risks to public health: Pointers to Good Practice
This 1998 UK Department of Health report by Peter Bennett aims to provide “pointers to good practice” based on well-established research that can be adapted to individual circumstances. It brings two main perspectives to bear. One is that offered by empirical research on reactions to risk. The second perspective considers risk communication as a decision process. The report emphasizes the need to aim for an ideal of two-way communication, throughout the process of risk assessment and management, both as a way of enhancing trust and as a guard against taking too narrow a view of the issues.
Responding to community outrage: Strategies for effective risk communication
This book by Peter Sandman focuses on public outrage about risk: the sources of outrage, some ways to address it, and why companies and agencies find it so difficult to address (cognitively, organizationally, and psychologically). Aspects of risk communication that do not bear directly on the dilemma of outrage are omitted.
Risk communication in practice
Rethinking communication in risk interpretation and action
This 2017 paper by Shabana Khan and colleagues shows the role of communication as a moderator of not just risk interpretation and action but also various factors responsible for shaping overall response, such as individual decision-making under uncertainty, heuristics, past experiences, learning, trust, complexity, scale and the social context. An in-depth understanding of ongoing communication and its implications can help to plan risk management more effectively over time rather than just as as a short-term response.
Risk Communication and Natural Hazards
This 2010 report by Corina Höppner, Michael Bründl, Matthias Buchecker, and colleagues provides a comprehensive review of risk communication practices across all phases of the risk cycle: prevention/preparation, warning, emergency response, and recovery/reorganization. It emphasizes communication strategies aimed at reducing severe impacts from natural hazards and enhancing community resilience.
Disaster Planning and Risk Communication With Vulnerable Communities: Lessons From Hurricane Katrina
This 2007 study examines the role of social networks in effective risk communication during disasters. It highlights lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina regarding the importance of community-based strategies that consider the unique challenges faced by vulnerable populations.
Risk communication, public engagement, and climate change: A role for emotions
This 2012 paper by Sabine Roeser discusses the potential role that emotions might play in enticing a lifestyle that diminishes climate change. It suggests that the current debate about climate change is conducted in too abstract terms, which leads people to accept the facts but not to do anything about them. It suggests that communication about climate change should trigger moral emotions to entice moral reflection and motivation for a more sustainable lifestyle.
Understanding risk communication best practices: A guide for emergency managers and communicators
This 2012 report by Melissa Janoske, Brooke Liu and Ben Sheppard delves into research-driven recommendations for effective risk communication practices, and should be viewed as a discussion of the most important findings for risk communicators and managers. The report is paired with a second report by the same authors – Understanding risk communication theory: A guide for emergency managers and communicators . This second report by Ben Sheppard, Melissa Janoske and Brooke Liu discusses and dissects theories and models relevant to US federal, state, and local homeland security personnel and emergency managers faced with communicating risks within their communities.
Communicating and engaging in the face of epidemics and pandemics
Practical Guide for Health Risk Communication
The Practical Guide for Risk Communication offers practical recommendations and tools to support the development of evidence-based messages, tailored for different sub-populations and target groups across various cultural contexts with the aim to further improve risk communication and the management of national or international public health threats at different phases of a major infectious disease outbreak. This work evolves from the TELL ME project – a 36 month (2014-2016) EU Collaborative Project, which aimed to provide evidence and to develop models for improved risk communication during infectious disease crises. A summary of the results can be found in the article Using communication to fight epidemics.
Epidemics and Pandemics, the response of society
ASSET (Action plan in Science in Society in Epidemics and Total pandemics) is a 48 month (2014-2017) EU project to learn to address effectively scientific and societal challenges raised by pandemics and associated crisis management. Paper series include: Risk communication in time of an epidemic or pandemic; and The role of citizens in times of an epidemic or pandemic.
A literature review on effective risk communication for the prevention and control of communicable diseases in Europe
This 2013 review by Jennifer Infanti and colleagues examines the current body of literature on risk communication related to communicable diseases, focusing on: (i) definitions and theories of risk communication; (ii) methodologies, tools and guidelines for risk communication research, policy and implementation; and (iii) implications, insights and key lessons learned from the application of risk communication principles in real-world settings.
When food is cooking up a storm – Proven recipes for risk communications
The objective of these guidelines – a joint initiative of the European Food Safety Authority and national food safety organisations in Europe – is to provide a framework to assist decision-making about appropriate communications approaches in a wide variety of situations that can occur when assessing and communicating on risks related to food safety in Europe. The aim is to provide a common framework applicable for developing communications approaches on risk across public health authorities in different countries.
Rethinking communication in risk interpretation and action
This 2017 paper by Shabana Khan and colleagues positions communication not simply as a channel for conveying risk information but as something that actively shapes how people interpret and respond to risk. It draws attention to the interplay between communication and the wider factors at work in any risk setting, including trust, prior experience, social context, and how people make decisions under uncertainty. The paper makes a useful case for treating communication as an ongoing element of risk management rather than a one-off intervention.
The Communicating for change page has links to a number of closely aligned resources. The managing participation pages explore the engagement and two-way process dimensions in more depth, while the climate adaptation pages address many of the applied risk contexts where this work plays out. A number of other pages and sections across this site provide information on related areas, including research approaches that support more participatory communication and concepts such as social licence to operate.
[* Photo: Flickr – Paul Welding]