Free download.
Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device.
You can download and read online Communicating Health Risks to the Public: A Global Perspective file PDF Book only if you are registered here.
And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Communicating Health Risks to the Public: A Global Perspective book.
Happy reading Communicating Health Risks to the Public: A Global Perspective Bookeveryone.
Download file Free Book PDF Communicating Health Risks to the Public: A Global Perspective at Complete PDF Library.
This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats.
Here is The CompletePDF Book Library.
It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Communicating Health Risks to the Public: A Global Perspective Pocket Guide.
Summary. This book reviews current health risk communication strategies, and examines and assesses the technical and psycho-sociological tools available to.
Table of contents
- Supplementary Information
- Communicating Health Risks to the Public
- Communicating Risks to the Public - International Perspectives | R.E Kasperson | Springer
Increased awareness typically creates a need for information seeking for purposes of clarification and validation, and thus awareness enhances information seeking and sharing. Increased knowledge and understanding is a key mid-term outcome and thus is related to a number of outcome components eg, increased information seeking, reduced uncertainty, and increased self-efficacy. The long-term emergency risk communication outcome alignment of risk perceptions to actual risk is critical for managing public concern and engendering appropriate responses by the target audience.
Risk perceptions that are too high may result in unnecessary concerns and actions, including some that may increase harm. Ongoing use of bottled water long after water advisories have expired, for example, is a well-documented phenomenon resulting in needless expense. Risk perceptions that are too low may result in failure to take recommended actions.
People not evacuating in the face of hurricane warnings, for example, is an ongoing challenge for emergency managers.
Supplementary Information
Increased knowledge and understanding and increased self-efficacy through actionable messages are related to behavior change. Seasonal flu messages, for example, emphasize understanding how the virus is transmitted, and give advice on nonpharmaceutical actions, such as social distancing and school closures, to reduce transmission. When an audience has an understanding of the actions they can take, they are more likely to take them. For other groups and agencies, behavior changes may involve a variety of recommendations, resource allocation decisions, or specific interventions and therapies.
These individual, group, and agency changes are themselves associated with reduced levels of mortality and morbidity during and after an emergency. As with many communication models, this emergency risk communication evaluation model includes a recognition of larger contextual factors that influence how an emergency unfolds see Figure 1. All crises are contextual, and communicators need to understand how outside factors influence communication strategy and messages. Contextual factors include specific crisis conditions, existing knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, target audience demographics, health literacy, and experience with previous crises.
The specific conditions of a public health emergency are particularly important considerations given the variability of risk factors and crisis types. Other contextual variables include location, scope of impact, and type of hazard. Previous experience is especially influential in determining how emergency risk communication strategy and messages are developed, shared, and refined.
Communicating Health Risks to the Public
The elements, relationships, and stages identified in emergency risk communication—as with other forms of communication—are dynamic and interact in often complex and unanticipated ways. The dynamics of a public health emergency are especially challenging for communicators when circumstances are evolving quickly, scientific understanding is incomplete or uncertain, and routine information flows are disrupted.
The process of communicating effectively during an emergency is complex, multi-directional, interactive, and highly contingent. Members of target audiences may not progress through the communication process at the same pace. People may receive information about an emergency at different times. Moreover, changes in messages or the inclusion of new audiences will require communicators to go through messaging strategy iteratively while also taking into account information already received. Iterations of messaging can result in the perception that information is contradictory and inconsistent, and that sources lack transparency and openness.
Other relationships between the elements of the emergency risk communication process may be more or less salient depending on the specific event.
Communicating Risks to the Public - International Perspectives | R.E Kasperson | Springer
For example, timely messaging may be less salient with slow-moving crises. Message sufficiency may be less important when the risk is well understood and familiar. The emergency risk communication evaluation model also illustrates the complexity of the overall communication process. Achieving understanding and supporting adherence to behavioral recommendations in the context of an uncertain and threatening situation requires a number of steps and processes functioning in a relatively coherent and systematic manner.
Measuring the constructs described above will provide insight into how emergency risk communication works and what specific practices are likely to have the most impact on health-related outcomes. Message dissemination through multiple channels or partners, for example, is a critical early step in the emergency risk communication process and is closely associated with timing, which is often tied to the agency review process to ensure scientifically accurate messages. Similarly, behavior change is the consequence of a variety of interacting factors, and many may be beyond the control of the agency managing the event.
It is important that public health communicators and their emergency management counterparts understand, operationalize, measure, and analyze the complexities of the communication process, knowing that systemic and behavioral changes are not easily attained. The model presented here defines the key constructs of emergency risk communication for evaluation while noting influences on communication in a public health emergency response that may facilitate or limit the impact of messages and messaging strategy.
The emergency risk communication model was developed as the first step in an effort to assess the effectiveness of a program of public health communication in a crisis context. The next steps are to operationalize the constructs in ways that allow for measurement. Some constructs, such as clear messages and scientific accuracy , are more easily measured, while others, such as message sufficiency and openness and transparency, will be challenging.
Specifying the relationships between constructs and identifying associations with the level of harm associated with an emergency will create additional challenges, since different threats can have different levels and scopes of potential harm. Moreover, determining the level of harm that may have resulted in the absence of emergency risk communication presents a host of methodological challenges common across prevention efforts.
While the emergency risk communication model was developed as a conceptual framework for assessment, as we have noted at several points, it has other implications and practical applications. The emergency risk communication model describes constructs and relationships that can inform practice. First, by clarifying and describing the various constructs and processes in emergency risk communication, places for enhanced attention and resources are identified.
For example, public health partners are important at several points in the process. Insufficient numbers of partners, or partners that are not affiliated with critical audiences, may limit the effectiveness of emergency risk communication and suggest to agencies that they need to invest in developing partnerships. Similarly, the model suggests that social media can be important at several places in the emergency risk communication process, which may point to the need to develop enhanced social media capacity. Second, sharing the emergency risk communication model as a general conceptual framework for emergency risk communication may enhance the ability of public health partners, response agencies, and the public to coordinate activities and participate in preparation and response.
The processes, goals, and values represented in the model can provide the broad understanding that allows others to more effectively coordinate activities.
Moreover, disseminating the model enhances transparency of the emergency risk communication process. Third, the model helps demonstrate the role and value of emergency risk communication. Promoting understanding by administrators and managers is a critical step in resource allocation.
Moreover, understanding is helpful in positioning communication as a strategic management function for preparing and responding to a range of threats and events. Finally, the model highlights issues and identifies specific focus areas that communicators can consider when developing communication strategy and monitor over the course of a response to improve the impact of their efforts during public health emergencies.
The emergency risk communication model represents a set of evidence-based message development and dissemination processes, outcomes, and characteristics associated with effective communication. Understanding the relationships between these elements may also help public health communicators understand how specific activities can support improved health outcomes. Further refinement of the emergency risk communication model will require additional empirical testing of the relationships between variables.
While many of these relationships have already been specified in the literature on emergency risk communication, they have not been positioned within a larger system of communication as described in the model presented here. In addition, the emergency risk communication model was developed in the context of public health emergencies and the communication initiated by public health agencies, such as the CDC, during response efforts. Public health, as noted earlier, is a relatively new participant in larger emergency risk communication processes.
Generalizing these elements and relationships to other contexts and agencies with extensive emergency risk communication experience eg, FEMA, World Health Organization creates an additional opportunity to extend the model to other partners at multiple levels of government.
Additional investigation is necessary to validate and refine the model in ways that allow for measurement and assessment. Although emergency risk communication is generally recognized as central to risk management and emergency response, there are few efforts to systematically assess its impact.
- Communicating Health Risks to the Public | A Global Perspective | Taylor & Francis Group.
- The Eye of The Beholder: Photography of John Cannon.
- International Perspectives;
- Communicating health risks to the public : a global perspective / Dawn Hillier - Details - Trove?
Assessment is necessary for benchmarking, refining understanding, and improving practice. In addition, assessment can also help improve subsequent crisis planning and preparation. Models such as this can be helpful during the uncertainty and chaos of an event. A significant body of empirical research, anecdotal experience, and case studies suggest that communication plays a central role in successful management of emergencies.
The specific mechanisms of the impact of emergency risk communication have not been clarified, tested, or assessed. Doing so ultimately has the potential to improve the effectiveness of emergency risk communication in containing and reducing harm. This project used the evidence-based literature to describe the elements of emergency risk communication and how they interact.
The emergency risk communication evaluation model developed through this process contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the ways communication may function to protect public health during emergencies. Login to your account Username. Forgot password? Keep me logged in. New User. Change Password. Old Password. New Password. Password Changed Successfully Your password has been changed. Create a new account Email. Returning user. Can't sign in?