Communicating risk during early phases of COVID-19: Comparing governing structures for emergency risk communication across four contexts

Abstract

BackgroundEmergency risk communication (ERC) is key to achieving compliance with public health measures during pandemics. Yet, the factors that facilitated ERC during COVID-19 have not been analyzed. We compare ERC in the early stages of the pandemic across four socio-economic settings to identify how risk communication can be improved in public health emergencies (PHE).MethodsTo map and assess the content, process, actors, and context of ERC in Germany, Guinea, Nigeria, and Singapore, we performed a qualitative document review, and thematically analyzed semi-structured key informant interviews with 155 stakeholders involved in ERC at national and sub-national levels. We applied Walt and Gilson's health policy triangle as a framework to structure the results.ResultsWe identified distinct ERC strategies in each of the four countries. Various actors, including governmental leads, experts, and organizations with close contact to the public, collaborated closely to implement ERC strategies. Early integration of ERC into preparedness and response plans, lessons from previous experiences, existing structures and networks, and clear leadership were identified as crucial for ensuring message clarity, consistency, relevance, and an efficient use of resources. Areas of improvement primarily included two-way communication, community engagement, and monitoring and evaluation. Countries with recurrent experiences of pandemics appeared to be more prepared and equipped to implement ERC strategies.ConclusionWe found that considerable potential exists for countries to improve communication during public health emergencies, particularly in the areas of bilateral communication and community engagement as well as monitoring and evaluation. Building adaptive structures and maintaining long-term relationships with at-risk communities reportedly facilitated suitable communication. The findings suggest considerable potential and transferable learning opportunities exist between countries in the global north and countries in the global south with experience of managing outbreaks.

Demand and satisfaction analysis of short health videos among Chinese urban youth: A mixed-methods study based on the KANO model

“…Chaffee et al (1991) broadened this definition to include trust in the entire media ecosystem, not just isolated segments. The COVID-19 outbreak severely tested China's disease prevention and risk communication systems, established in response to past crises like SARS, highlighting the critical need for reliable health information (Geurts et al 2023;Schaefer et al 2017). Since the 2003 SARS crisis, the media landscape has transformed dramatically with the widespread adoption of mobile and social media, diversification of information sources, and a rise in user-generated content (Raj and Meel, 2022).…”

Political Leaders’ Communication Strategies during COVID-19 in Highly Infected Countries: A Scoping Review

“… Political polarization and weak executive federalism hindered a unified national response, leading to varied state-level responses and differing pandemic management outcomes across the USA. Geurts et al, 2023 [ 61 ] Germany, Guinea, Nigeria, and Singapore Qualitative document review and key informant interviews Each country exhibited unique emergency risk communication (ERC) strategies, with early integration into plans being vital; however, improvements were needed in interactive communication, community involvement, and monitoring. Countries with past pandemic experience showed better preparedness for ERC execution.…”

The Influence of Social, Political, and Social Media on COVID-19 Risk Communication and Health Behaviour in Thailand

“…One of the effective tools to inform the public is risk communication [9] especially the bilateral communication for public engagement because it can improve the public awareness during the pandemic [10]. Furthermore, it has the potential to increase an individual's understanding of COVID-19 and improve relationships with the public, supporting and facilitating long-term implementation of risk communication [11]. It can also improve their attitude, which can affect their behaviour [12].…”