S O C I A L S C I E N C E T O O L S F O R C O A S T A L P R O G R A M S

Basics
Risk Communication
About This Publication
Some of the most challenging decisions in coastal management stem from the
relationship between people and the environment. NOAA provides technical
assistance to coastal management professionals addressing complex human-
based problems.

Risk Communication Basics is the ninth in a series of publications developed

to bring information to coastal managers about the use of social science tools
in their field of work. This document shares insights into why people respond
to risk the way they do. Coastal managers will find examples and tips for
working with residents to explore solutions and make decisions to improve
the resilience of coastal communities. This material is linked to the interactive
training webinar provided by the Office for Coastal Management, Seven Best
Practices for Risk Communication (see coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/training/risk-
communication).

This guidebook was developed through a partnership of the NOAA Office for
Coastal Management and the Jacques Cousteau National Estuarine Research
Reserve, with contractor Sarah Watson, graduate student at Rutgers University.

NOAA’s Office for Coastal Management

“Coastal management” is the term used by communities and organizations
striving to keep the nation’s coasts safe from storms, rich in natural resources,
and economically strong. The national lead for these efforts is NOAA’s Office for
Coastal Management, an organization devoted to partnerships, science, and
good policy. This agency, housed within the National Ocean Service, oversees
major initiatives that include the Coral Reef Conservation Program, Digital
Coast, National Coastal Zone Management Program, and National Estuarine
Research Reserve System.
Table of Contents
Introduction....................................................................................................................................... 1

Why People Do What They Do........................................................................................................... 3

Information Shortcuts..................................................................................................................................3
Finite Pool of Worry.......................................................................................................................................5
Past Experiences...........................................................................................................................................5
Acceptable Level of Risk...............................................................................................................................5
Friends and Family........................................................................................................................................5
Worldview......................................................................................................................................................6
What People Value........................................................................................................................................7

Inspiring Risk-Wise Behavior............................................................................................................. 8

Don’t Do This.................................................................................................................................................8
Do This Instead..............................................................................................................................................9

Communicating with the Audience................................................................................................. 12

Framing the Conversation..........................................................................................................................12
Sample Conversations................................................................................................................................13

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................ 15

Additional Resources....................................................................................................................... 16

Bibliography..................................................................................................................................... 18
Introduction
Communication is never as easy as it seems. Too often what we think we say is not what the
other person hears. That’s because people often present information using the data and stories
most pertinent to their point of view. But to be truly heard, understanding the audience’s
perspectives and values, and addressing their specific concerns, is crucial.

This approach is particularly important for communicating about risk. Community leaders who
interact with a diverse group of residents can better understand the emotions and values that
affect how individuals perceive and respond to risk. Together they can explore various solutions
and make decisions that are best for their families and the community in the short term and for
the future. Good risk communication is an essential element of good community health.

This guidebook provides an overview of risk communication best practices. Also included is
information about how and why people perceive risks differently, how to learn more about
the audience, and ways to frame responses, as well as sample conversations to illustrate these
techniques. This guide is only an overview. A list of related resources and a bibliography are
included at the end.

1
Why People Do What They Do
Every person is different. Social science research, Shortcuts can affect the ability to make the
however, provides insights on how a person’s risk right decision at the right time, cause people to
perception and actions are influenced by experiences, underestimate some risks and overestimate others,
feelings, personal values, and the ideas held by friends and even lead people to deny a risk exists! For example,
and family. Understanding these influences enables the confirmation bias may lead someone who believes
communicator to facilitate more effective conversations climate change is not occurring to consider a big snow
with a wide variety of audiences. storm as proof of that belief. Someone’s optimism bias
may lead them to think their house won’t flood during
This section provides an overview of the concepts that
a hurricane because their town is rarely affected by
help us answer that age-old question—“why do people
tropical cyclones. But the inverse can be true, too. A
do what they do?”
combination of availability and social amplification
Information Shortcuts shortcuts may lead someone whose house recently was
flooded in a serious storm to think that their home is
People typically process information in two key ways:
at risk of being flooded in every storm. Understanding
through emotions and experiences, or analytically.
how these shortcuts work can help communicators
These can be thought of as thinking fast or thinking
recognize how their audience perceives a risk and better
slow. When thinking fast, people act on feelings and
understand the action an audience takes, if one is taken.
past experiences. Thinking analytically, on the other
Communicators also can acknowledge some of these
hand, takes time and energy. Making the decision to
shortcuts in their communications.
get out of the house if someone smells smoke, for
instance, takes a lot less time and mental energy than
determining whether a coastal storm poses a flood risk
to one’s home!

Because analytical thinking requires time and effort,

people create mental shortcuts to make decisions about
risks. These shortcuts rely on a number of biases that
both help and hinder people.

3
 Common Mental Shortcuts
• Status quo: Doing nothing because change is hard.
▷▷ Example: “I sometimes think we should elevate our house, but we just haven’t gotten around to doing it.”

• Optimism: Assuming bad things happen to others, not you.

▷▷ Example: “I didn’t evacuate because I didn’t think the storm would be that bad. We just don’t get those
kinds of floods here.”

• Anchoring: Thinking the impact of a previous event is the worst you’ll ever experience.
▷▷ Example: “I lived through Hurricane Katrina and my house didn’t flood. My house will always be safe.”

• Confirmation: Cherry-picking information to confirm what you already believe.

▷▷ Example: “What global warming? We just had the most frigid winter I’ve ever been through.”

• Single action: Making one change and thinking that action offers enough protection.
▷▷ Example: “We elevated our hot water heater and furnace last year. That’s all we need to do to protect us
from a flood.”

• Solutionism: Assuming that someone will find a solution, quite often a technological one, which
overrides the need to take action now.
▷▷ Example: “They will build a flood wall around the town in a few years. We don’t need to elevate our
house now.”

• Availability: Allowing the strength of a memory, and the feelings associated with that memory,
to affect how you view future events.
▷▷ Example: “Sandy’s storm surge was terrifying. I never want to go through that again. I know next time we
will evacuate.”

• Social amplification: Paying the most attention to risks commonly discussed.

▷▷ Example: “I see so many stories and videos about tornados that I’m much more afraid of those than I am
of flooding from a nor’easter.”

4
Finite Pool of Worry Acceptable Level of Risk
Humans are best at perceiving risks that are personal Everyone has a different risk threshold. This threshold is
and immediate. The mind does not work as well in influenced by an individual’s previous experiences and
perceiving future risks or a risk that doesn’t feel like a what that person personally values. As a result, a long-
personal threat. Additionally, people have something time coastal resident may see nuisance tidal flooding as
many psychologists call a finite pool of worry, which normal and not a threat, while someone who has never
means people can only emotionally process so many lived at the coast sees the same risk as a major threat.
worrisome things at a time. As a result, people prioritize Someone else may value the lure of living near the coast
the things that are the most urgent and put off those much more than the financial and emotional challenges
that don’t feel imminent. For example, someone who of recovering from a damaging flood. Another person
is worried about moving back into a house recently may be extremely risk averse and choose not to
damaged by a flood is most likely going to disregard move to a flood-prone area, or choose to move away
information about how sea level rise will affect the after a minor flood. Communicators who understand
house in 30 years. Another person who is struggling the acceptable level of risk of the person they are
to pay monthly household bills likely won’t pay much communicating with will have a better understanding of
attention to suggestions to elevate the house to bring that individual’s response to the risk.
the structure up to current flood code. This is important
for communicators to recognize so they don’t cause Friends and Family
residents to walk away from the conversation because People rely on friends and family for cues about risks
they are overwhelmed. and personal values. People spend a lot of time with
these groups, and this membership is an important
Past Experiences part of a person’s identity. As a result, people often
People draw on past experiences and emotions about unconsciously find their beliefs shifting to match others
those experiences when thinking about and responding in their group. Some of this is based on the level of
to risk. For example, residents may be more likely to trust found with friends and family. When peers tend to
move their car when an extreme high tide is predicted if dismiss a threat, the individual is likely to do so as well.
their car has been damaged in the past. But those who This matters especially to communicators as they work
haven’t experienced chronic nuisance flooding may not to find trusted sources to share messages and partner
know the risk exists. Even though experienced residents on communications.
may tell newcomers about the threat, mental shortcuts
may lead newcomers to underestimate the impact.
Emotions tied to past experiences can have a greater
influence on risk response than just the recollection of
the experiences themselves, particularly when strong
emotions surface. Communicators can use these
experiences and emotions as part of their messages
about future risks to help residents remember what
has happened in the past and what could happen in
the future. However, it is important to invoke negative
emotions sparingly, since those can cause the audience
to ignore warnings or advice.

5
 WORLDVIEW CONTINUUM
Hierarchy

Hierarchy/Individualism Hierarchy/Communitarian

Communitarian
Individualism

My freedom to make decisions If it’s good enough for me,

without interference is paramount it’s good enough for you

Egalitarian/Individualism Egalitarian/Communitarian

We should all be free to make our We are all in this together

own choices

Egalitarian
Adapted from Kahan, 2012

Worldview
Risk perception also is influenced by how one views families. For these people, framing the conversation to
the world, particularly how one thinks society should focus on individual preparedness or taking care of the
function. Worldview influences thinking on a wide individual may resonate most.
variety of issues, including public policy related to People who lean toward the communitarian side of
coastal risks. People unconsciously connect the risk the equation tend to think society functions best when
with the actions and policies proposed as solutions. people work together for the common good. They are
If the solution conflicts with how one thinks society more likely to use words such as “our” and “we” when
should function, people often unconsciously downplay describing their families or neighborhoods. For these
the threat or dismiss the risk altogether. Learning how people, framing the conversation to focus on working
people view the world can help risk communicators together and community preparedness may resonate
understand how to shape the conversation. the most.
Four categories are useful for understanding worldview: People who lean toward a hierarchy worldview tend to
individualism to communitarianism, and hierarchy to value more clearly defined ranking systems within social
egalitarianism. roles and norms. Those who lean toward egalitarianism
Those who lean toward individualism tend to think tend to value equality of all people without clearly
society functions best with fewer regulations and defined ranks and social norms.
restrictions. These people are more likely to use words These are not foolproof clues, but they can help. If
such as “my” or “I” when describing themselves or their in doubt, try to use the same words the audience is

6
using. By reflecting the audience’s tone and language conversation. This skill takes time to learn and plenty
(provided it’s not angry or disrespectful), communicators of practice. In the end, it’s about truly listening to
demonstrate respect and help build trust. understand someone else’s worldview, demonstrating
respect for other viewpoints, and reading other cues in
These categories do not explain everything about how
order to respond in ways that address individual needs.
someone sees the world, and rarely do people fall into
Communicating one-on-one is the best way to do this,
one discrete category. But understanding a person’s
though discussing risks in larger groups and public
or group’s worldview is helpful when designing an
meetings still offers opportunities to listen and build
approach and crafting a message.
relationships.
What People Value
Risk perception is influenced by what’s important to
people, such as their homes or their way of life. One
way to think about this influence is to consider how
people react negatively to the potential to lose or have
restrictions placed on things they value. For example,
someone who feels as though their bulkhead has
protected their home for many years may be upset
about new community requirements to replace older
hard structures with a living shoreline. If this person
leans toward the individualism side of worldview, the
risk communicator may want to highlight the direct
benefits of such a system to that homeowner. But if
this person leans toward the communitarian side of
worldview, the risk communicator may instead want
to highlight the benefits to the entire community.
If communicating about this topic with a diverse
audience, such as at a public meeting, highlighting
the benefits to both the community and individual
homeowner may be the best strategy.

Recognizing how people perceive risks, through

common shortcuts, personal experience, or other
factors described here, helps communicators
understand barriers and why people behave the way
they do. Knowing why we behave the way we do, what
other people value, and how they see the world helps
communicators better shape their message and their
overall approach to risk communication. But people
don’t wear their values, worldviews, or experiences on
their sleeves. It is up to the risk communicator, through
observations and instincts, to decide how to shape the

7
 Inspiring Risk-Wise Behavior
The primary goal of risk communication is to help won’t damage their house because they’ve never had
people understand risk and make decisions that keep storm damage in the past, or they think the threat is
families and communities as safe as possible. This being overplayed by the media.
section connects risk perceptions with communication Simply providing more information about a risk will
strategies. Understanding what not to do is a good place not work. In discussing risks—especially long-term
to start. coastal hazards—communicators should highlight what
is important to individuals and what they should do to
Don’t Do This address the risk. Communicators should not assume
Social science researchers say that two approaches everyone agrees with the same solutions, that every
often employed by people and organizations are often solution is realistic for everyone, and that making
the most ineffective—providing people who seem decisions to reduce a risk is a simple mental process.
unreceptive with more and more information, and
Invoke Fear and Anxiety
invoking fear or anxiety without offering realistic and
People worried about coastal hazards and climate
actionable solutions. These approaches are explored
change often assume that sharing their emotions will
below.
spur others to take action. These people tend to use
Provide More Information without Action dread or fear as the dominant theme in their message.
Why do some people fail to respond to a coastal flood But people can only worry about so many things at
threat or fail to evacuate when a storm is approaching? one time. Invoking fear, dread, or anxiety as the sole
Why don’t people construct beyond minimum flood theme of the message—without discussing concrete
code standards when building an oceanfront home? Do and realistic ways to reduce the risk—frequently causes
you feel these actions are hard to understand? others who don’t feel the same way to shut down, tune
People often assume that others feel and think the out, or leave the conversation altogether.
same way they do, and that whatever information is For example, when discussing how sea level rise will
meaningful for one person will be meaningful for all. affect a coastal community, using dramatic language
Hurricane evacuations provide a good example, since and imagery of the aftermath of a storm may reflect the
there are many reasons why people don’t leave. Some communicator’s emotions and feelings. But this same
people are afraid to leave their property or have a pet information can overwhelm others, making them feel
that is difficult to transport. Others think the storm

COMMUNICATION TIP:

Make it local, not about the science

Chances are that readers of this guide find the science and technical details about coastal
flood risks compelling. But others may not receive this information in the same way. One way
to overcome this discrepancy is to focus on what people can observe in their community, such
as increases in street flooding, storm surge impacts, and erosion. Focusing on what residents
have observed is a way to bring the message closer to home, which makes the impacts real and
personal and avoids a debate about technical details.

8
helpless about their ability to prepare for the risk, or This approach takes time to learn and plenty of practice.
they may tune out entirely thinking the risk is blown out Listed below are a few key steps to take when engaging
of proportion. Use language that is more neutral, and if in a conversation about risks.
using post-storm imagery or sea level rise maps, include
• Recognize how individuals perceive risks and why
information that shows how residents can respond. This
those perceptions affect their actions. Identify what is
information can reduce feelings of helplessness and
behind the other person’s point of view.
help turn fearful emotions into realistic actions.
• Learn what the audience values and how these values
Do This Instead influence risk perception. Understand what the
audience cares about.
To inspire risk-wise behavior, communicators must work
• Shape or frame the message to affirm the values of
to overcome communication hurdles. So what does
those receiving the message. Frame the conversation
work?
to meet individual needs.
It’s important to remember that minds and behaviors Not every communication situation is the same. There
don’t change overnight. There are no magic words, are one-on-one interactions and conversations with
and there are no perfect phrases. Risk communication small groups whose members have different worldviews
research has continually shown that people gradually and values. Sometimes it is a one-time conversation,
change their minds and behaviors when presented other times, it is a continuing dialogue.
with information that affirms how they view the
Addressing these situations requires different methods,
world and what they already believe. This does not
but there are a number of risk communication best
mean telling people what they already know, but rather
practices that are important for all types of engagement.
really listening to understand the audience’s worldview
and what matters to them. Multiple trusted sources Get to Know the Audience
must present the information, and it must be repeated Communicators can’t craft an effective message if they
often. Information also must be paired with realistic don’t know the audience and what matters to that
actions and solutions. Effective risk communication audience. Learn who they are, what they care about,
efforts use an approach that allows a diverse set of and what challenges they may face in addressing risks.
stakeholders to explore risk and identify appropriate When speaking with a larger group, ask questions
solutions together, while addressing the emotions and before or even during the presentation through various
values that influence response. facilitation techniques, such as instant polling. If talking

COMMUNICATION TIP:

Stories make a difference

Stories, examples, and even relevant metaphors are important learning tools. Stories help
information become real and relevant, allowing people to see the effects of a potential risk.
However, it’s important to select examples that are appropriate and realistic to the audience and
to refrain from overdramatizing.

9
 with someone one-on-one, listen actively and ask good Speak to the Audience’s Interests, Not Yours
questions to learn about the person and make better Local planners may be most interested in finding
decisions about communicating. support for new ordinances. Construction officials
may be most interested in getting builders to exceed
Know the Goal
minimum flood codes. Residents may be more
Have an action-oriented goal that identifies the desired
concerned about property values or beach access.
behavior change. The goal may be to help homeowners
Learn what the audience cares about. Frame the
understand why building their houses to exceed current
conversation to connect these interests with the overall
flood standards is prudent, or to educate residents
risk messages.
so they can provide informed opinions on future
flood reduction plans. Identifying these goals helps Offer Realistic and Appropriate Solutions and
communicators determine how to proceed. Options
Information without specified actions leads to inaction.
Develop a Communication Plan
Pairing information about risks with ways people can
Knowing the audience and goal are crucial first steps.
respond is critical. This can be challenging because
Identify the approach for discussing the risk, the
some actions may not be appropriate or feasible
tone, relevant solutions, and responses to potentially
for some audience members. Invite residents into a
challenging questions. Having a good plan helps
conversation about things they can do and even work
presenters deliver the message effectively and reach the
together to identify potential responses.
risk communication goals.
Develop and Deliver the Right Message
Explain the Risk in a Manner That Is Clear and
Crafting the right message sounds easier than it
Appropriate
is, but knowing the goals and the audience will
Talking about risks using technical terms can be a
help immensely. Make sure to test the message or
recipe for misunderstanding. It’s important to discuss
product with members of the actual audience before
risks in a way that resonates with the audience. Focus
expanding the effort. This helps ensure that others will
on local and observable impacts, because those make
understand and correctly interpret what is being said.
the risk tangible and real. Acknowledge what is known
Recognize that people have different preferences for
and unknown when responding to questions. Avoid
receiving information. Some like to attend meetings or
overloading the audience with too much information at
presentations, others prefer a letter or email, and some
one time.

COMMUNICATION TIP:

Talking about uncertainty

• When discussing future impacts, scientists and engineers often discuss the level of uncertainty.
Someone trained in math and science thinks about uncertainty in terms of what they know. Most
others hear the term and think about what they don’t know. Avoid using this term whenever
possible because it could undermine the argument.
• The words “could” and “may,” when used to discuss a negative impact, can introduce doubt and
cause people to unconsciously focus on the small probability that something might not happen.

10
don’t use the Internet or have a cell phone. Use multiple make decisions for their future. At the same time, it’s
methods of communication and keep messages important not to give audiences false hope. Telling
consistent. residents whose homes will be permanently inundated
from sea level rise in 10 years that their way of life will
Use Trusted Messengers
stay the same is not realistic.
Trust is an essential component of effective
communication. Delivering the message repeatedly and In the end, people must be engaged in respectful
through a variety of trusted sources helps the audience conversations as part of an ongoing dialogue. These
accept and internalize the information and gradually conversations may not be easy, depending on the topic,
change behavior. Make sure everyone is on the same the consequences for the other person, and the person’s
page if using messengers from multiple organizations. values. Encouraging open discussion and respectful
One note about trusted messengers and partners: debate creates an environment of openness. This helps
building trust with an audience may take a substantial build trust, especially for people who may already feel
amount of time, especially with a history of distrust. shut out of a conversation because they feel they are
Trust can be damaged easily, and it is very difficult to not being heard.
rebuild.

Respect Different Viewpoints and Acknowledge

Emotions
Learning about risks can trigger strong emotions. Some
people may have strong opposing views on risks and
solutions. It’s important to respect everyone’s viewpoint
and to acknowledge emotions as they arise.

Stay positive and don’t be dismissive. Let people know

they are not alone in how they feel. It’s also important
when discussing emotionally challenging topics,
such as severe sea level rise impacts on a community,
to help the audience find hope in the situation. For
example, one foot of sea level rise may inundate an
entire neighborhood in the next two decades, but the
community can work together to help those affected

COMMUNICATION TIP:

Words matter
We may think we speak the same language, but everyone has a unique vocabulary. Some words
peers understand but other people do not, so it’s important to be careful about using jargon and
overly technical terms. A good exercise to try is to explain your job to a family member who does
not know what you do. Think about the words you use. Ask them to let you know what they don’t
understand.

11
 Communicating with the Audience
Understanding the audience is an obvious linchpin for 2. Personal responsibility.
success, and this background information should not be Everyone needs to be responsible for their choices and
taken for granted. Conversation with the target audience actions. This type of approach appeals to people who
is one of the best ways to obtain a sense of their values believe in fewer regulations and restrictions. Highlight
and perspectives. Consider using these conversation why it’s important for people to be responsible for
starters to obtain good information about the target themselves, their decisions, and their property.
audience. Most receptive audience: People who value
• Where do you live and why did you choose that area? individualism. People who value hierarchy, authority,
• Do you consider this area to be your home? Why or and certainty likely value personal responsibility as well.
why not?
• What in our community is important to you? 3. Stewardship.
• What do you worry most about our community’s Being good stewards and protecting the planet is
future? important. Highlight that today’s stewardship affects
• What do you like best about where you live? Why? future generations by leaving the community and the
• During the last big storm, did your house have world a better place. This approach is often focused
any damage? more on future risks, such as sea level rise and
• Have you seen flooding in your community lately? climate change.
What was it like? Most receptive audience: People who value
• Are you worried about flooding? Why or why not? environmentalism and are community-focused. Some
• Do you have flood insurance? Why or why not? environmental issues can be politically polarizing.
When talking to someone who doesn’t value
Framing the Conversation environmentalism, avoid terms such as eco, green,
When information about the audience is known, the saving the planet, or ecosystem.
communicator can frame the conversation to connect
with personal core values. The following messages 4. Working together.
provide good examples. Working together to reduce damage from floods and
extreme weather is important. Highlight why working
1. Be prepared. together as a community is important to accomplish
“Be prepared for the next storm.” This empowering this task.
message appeals to a broad audience. Most receptive audience: People who are community-
Most receptive audience: All worldviews. Individual- and egalitarian-focused.
focused people see this as a call to take care of
themselves, while community-focused people view this
as a way to help the community at large. Make sure the
steps the audience can take to prepare themselves are
included in the conversation.

12
 a dream home. Engaging in a conversation also helps
Sample Conversations those who are upset feel like their concerns are valid
Best practices can help communicators achieve their and someone is listening.
desired goals. The following sample conversation
Also consider the worldview continuum (on page 6.)
demonstrates these risk communication principles
Is the person more individual-focused? What about
in action.
community-focused? Knowing this information can
Setting the scene: A resident is talking with a local help communicators determine the messaging to use
building official about a requirement to elevate her to affirm audience values. Simply responding with a
home if she goes forward with a major renovation blanket “these are the rules, I’m just doing my job” may
project. When the resident is informed that the reason further upset those who view regulations as contrary to
this requirement exists is to bring her house up to their personal values.
current flood elevation codes, the reaction may be
Assume this person is a homeowner, intends to live
Resident: “Why can’t the town just build a better in the house for many years, and has an individual-
bulkhead? That would solve the flooding problem.” focused worldview. Given her worldview, she is more
The local building official could easily react in a likely to view rules and regulations as a challenge to
defensive or flustered manner when posed with this her personal values. For this person, two approaches
question. Instead, the official should contemplate what may be the most helpful: personal responsibility and
is really behind the question and why this person is preparedness.
getting upset. Here’s what a sample response may sound like:
In this situation, the resident might be “While the town has a bulkhead, it’s still each
• Shifting blame and deflecting responsibility, likely homeowner’s responsibility to make sure their property is
because she wants to avoid the cost of elevating prepared as best as possible for a flood. Even the best-
• Assuming that a single action (in this case, the town built barrier can fail. If your house is up and out of the
building a barrier) is enough to solve the problem way of the water, that means the possibility of damage
Here are some questions to consider before responding is reduced. This is about making you and your property
to the resident: better prepared for a flood.”

• Who is she? Is she new in town? Has she ever lived in Framing the response to highlight the homeowner’s own
a floodplain? Has she ever experienced a major storm? responsibility for preparedness helps connect to this
• What does she value? Why does she live where she person’s individualism worldview. While the building
lives? What does she care about? codes may seem onerous to those who view rules and
• What’s her emotional state and why? Is she angry regulations as contrary to their worldview and values,
about money? Regulations? highlighting their need for preparedness taps into their
values about taking care of themselves and avoiding the
The building official should engage in a conversation
recovery costs associated with a flood.
with the resident by asking about these topics. Learn
about the resident and what the resident cares For someone with a community-focused worldview,
about. What is she trying to accomplish with the the messaging should be different. A homeowner
renovation project? If she is a developer, the answer with a community-focused worldview is more likely to
might be very different from that of a retiree working on value the good of the community over the individual

13
 and support measures that benefit the community “Floods cost the town money. While flood control
at large. For this person, the “working together” and measures may cost money in the short term, we should be
“preparedness” approaches may be most helpful. able to better control costs and preserve lower tax rates in
the long-term because we won’t have to pay for repairs in
Here’s what a sample response may sound like:
the future.”
“A bulkhead that protects the entire town is very
If the resident says she likes the quality of life and the
important and something we continue to work on.
sense of community, then it is helpful to talk about
However, there will be storms where even the best-built
solutions to current and future flood risks as a way of
barrier can fail. It’s important that we work together as a
preserving the community’s character and safety.
town to make sure all of us are as prepared for flooding as
possible. This particular requirement is an important part “Flooding can cause people to move away because they
of this effort to help keep all of our residents safe.” can’t afford to rebuild, or they can’t afford to continue
running a business if they can’t get there. That causes the
A second conversation example:
community’s character to change, sometimes abruptly,
Resident: “All of these ideas about reducing flooding which can cause taxes to increase.”
sound interesting, but are they going to make my taxes
One final note: There is no such thing as a perfect
go up?”
response—there are no magic words or solutions.
Communicator: “Well, let’s see. First can I ask you However, the more communicators can repeatedly
a question? What in your community’s future is most discuss risks in a way that resonates with and affirms
important to you?” audience values, the more likely these messages will
If the resident responds that she wants to see begin to have an impact.
development and redevelopment because that helps
improve the tax base and keeps taxes lower, then it will
be helpful to talk about solutions to current and future
flood risks as a way of managing long-term costs.

14
Conclusion
Presenting the same facts over and over again does not represent effective risk communication.
Communicators need to understand why people respond or behave the way they do and how
their minds sometimes work against their own best interests when it comes to perceiving risk.
Understanding these dynamics can help officials be strategic in their communications, with the
ultimate payoff being lives saved and resilience efforts that enjoy strong community support.

While there is no such thing as perfect communication, or words that will automatically change
people’s minds, audiences are more likely to hear and respond to messages that highlight
what matters to them, affirm what they believe, and provide realistic and appropriate paths
for addressing the risk. Using a variety of trusted sources to deliver the message helps people
overcome mental barriers and recognize personal risks and impacts.

Change does not come overnight or after a single interaction. Good risk communication is an
ongoing process. This guide is an introduction to some of the social science principles that
affect risk perception and communication. And practice is a prerequisite to truly master the
methods described in this guide.

15
 Additional Resources
The Psychology of Climate Change Communication: A Guide for Scientists, Journalists, Educators, Political
Aides, and the Interested Public
This resource guide discusses the social science behind much of what makes communicating about climate change
and related risks so challenging.
cred.columbia.edu/guide

The Preparation Frame

This guide explains using the concept of preparedness as a dominant way of crafting your message.
climateaccess.org/preparation-frame

Communicating on Climate: 13 Steps and Guiding Principles

Use these 13 simple steps for crafting a message on climate change. The guide also includes a written example of
how to use these steps.
ecoamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Communicating-on-Climate-13-steps_ecoAmerica.pdf

Climate Communications and Behavior Change: A Guide for Practitioners

This guide combines behavior change and risk communication research into tools and recommendations.
climateaccess.org/resource/climate-communications-and-behavior-change

Connecting on Climate: A Guide to Effective Climate Change Communication

Learn the 10 principles for effective climate change risk communication in this guide, written through a partnership
with ecoAmerica and Columbia’s Center for Research on Environmental Decision-making.
connectingonclimate.org

NOAA Digital Coast Risk Communication Resources

This website showcases NOAA’s existing risk communication tools. Additional materials are added regularly.
coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/training/risk-communication

Risk Communication: Evolution and Revolution

This article by Vincent Covello and Peter Sandman provides a deeper discussion about social science as it pertains to
risk communication.
psandman.com/articles/covello.htm

EPA Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication

Discover essential practices for effective risk communication.
wvdhhr.org/bphtraining/courses/cdcynergy/content/activeinformation/resources/epa_seven_cardinal_rules.pdf

16
Citizen Corps Personal Behavior Change Model for Disaster Preparedness
This guide uses social science to identify how and why someone may or may not respond to risk information. The
guide also can help communicators when developing social marketing and outreach programs.
fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1854-25045-1045/citizen_prep_review_issue_4.pdf

Understanding Risk Communication Best Practices: A Guide for Emergency Managers and Communicators
This guide helps communicators understand how various public audiences prepare for, respond to, and recover from
crises and disasters to more effectively craft and execute risk messages in a complex media environment.
start.umd.edu/sites/default/files/files/publications/UnderstandingRiskCommunicationBestPractices.pdf

Risk Communication and Behavior: Best Practices and Research Findings

Best practices for communicating about various types of natural hazards are identified in this NOAA white paper.
www.ppi.noaa.gov/wp-content/uploads/Risk-Communication-and-Behavior-Best-Practices-and-Research-Findings-
July-2016.pdf

How to Communicate Successfully Regarding Nature-Based Solutions: Key Lessons from Research with
American Voters and Elites
The Nature Conservancy identifies how messaging involving green infrastructure and nature-based solutions
resonates with key audiences.
conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/Pages/nature-based-solutions.aspx

Nudge, by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein

This volume aimed at popular audiences goes into deep detail about some of the nuances of what influences our
decisions.

Fostering Sustainable Behavior, by Douglas McKenzie-Mohr

This book describes the how and why of a process called community-based social marketing. This process can be
used to help spur people to make small behavior changes.

The Feeling of Risk, edited by Paul Slovic

This collection of research articles examines how people perceive a variety of risks. While somewhat technical in
nature, this book provides an in-depth review of research literature.

17
 Bibliography
Cohen, Geoffrey. L. 2003. “Party over Policy: The Morozov, Evgeny. 2014. To Save Everything, Click Here:
Dominating Impact of Group Influence on Political The Folly of Technological Solutionism. Public Affairs.
Beliefs.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Volume 85, number 5. Pages 808 to 822. Moser, Susanne C. 2007. “More Bad News: The Risk of
Neglecting Emotional Responses to Climate Change
Furnham, Adrian, and Hua Chu Boo. 2011. “A Literature Information.” In Creating a Climate for Change. Moser
Review of the Anchoring Effect.” Journal of Socio- and Dilling, editors. Pages 64 to 80. Cambridge:
Economics. Volume 40, number 1. Pages 35 to 42. Cambridge University Press.
Kahan, Dan M. 2010. “Fixing the Communications Pike, C., K. Hyde, M. Herr, D. Minkow, and B. Doppelt.
Failure.” Nature. Volume 463. Pages 296 to 297. 2012. “Climate Communication and Engagement Efforts:
The Landscape of Approaches and Strategies.” A Report
Kahan, Dan M. 2012. “Cultural Cognition as a Conception to the Skoll Global Threats Fund. Eugene, Oregon: The
of the Cultural Theory of Risk.” In Handbook of Risk Resource Innovation Group’s Social Capital Project.
Theory. Roeser, Hillerbrand, Sandin, and Peterson,
editors. Pages 725 to 759. Springer Netherlands. Quattrone, George A., and Edward E. Jones. 1980. “The
Perception of Variability within In-Groups and Out-
Kahneman, Daniel. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Groups: Implications for the Law of Small Numbers.”
Straus, and Giroux. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 38,
number 1. Pages 141 to 152.
Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L. Knetsch, and Richard H.
Thaler. 1991. “Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Shepperd, James A., Patrick Carroll, Jodi Grace,
Aversion, and Status Quo Bias.” Journal of Economic and Meredith Terry. 2002. “Exploring the Causes of
Perspectives. Volume 5, number 1. Pages 193 to 206. Comparative Optimism.” Psychologica Belgica. Volume
42, number 1/2. Pages 65 to 98.
Kasperson, Jeanne X., Roger E. Kasperson, Nick Pidgeon,
and Paul Slovic. 2003. “The Social Amplification of Risk: Slovic, Paul, and Elke U. Weber. 2002. “Perception of
Assessing Fifteen Years of Research and Theory.” In The Risk Posed by Extreme Events.” In Regulation of Toxic
Social Amplification of Risk. Pidgeon, Kasperson, and Substances and Hazardous Waste (2nd edition, 2011).
Slovic, editors. Pages 13 to 46. Cambridge: Cambridge Applegate, Gabba, Laitos, and Sachs, editors. Pages 26
University Press. to 30. New York: Foundation Press.
Marx, Sabine M., Elke U. Weber, Benjamin S. Orlove, Weber, Elke. 2013. “Doing the Right Thing Willingly:
Anthony Leiserowitz, David H. Krantz, Carla Roncoli, and Using the Insights of Behavioral Decision Research for
Jennifer Phillips. 2007. “Communication and Mental Better Environmental Decisions.” In The Behavioral
Processes: Experiential and Analytic Processing of Foundations of Public Policy. Shafir, editor. Pages 380 to
Uncertain Climate Information.” Global Environmental 397. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Change. Volume 17, number 1. Pages 47 to 58.
Yudkowsky, Eliezer. 2008. “Cognitive Biases Potentially
Mileti, Dennis S., and John H. Sorensen. 1990. Affecting Judgment of Global Risks.” In Global
Communication of Emergency Public Warnings: A Social Catastrophic Risks. Bostrom and Cirkovic, editors. Pages
Science Perspective and State-of-the-Art Assessment. 91 to 119. New York: Oxford University Press.
Prepared for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Washington, D.C. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge
National Laboratory. Accessed at www.osti.gov/scitech/
servlets/purl/6137387.

18
OFFICE FOR COASTAL MANAGEMENT

2016