Communications Strategy for Health Impact Assessments: Meeting Policy-Makers' Information Needs

TS7

Symposium Title: Risk Assessment Tools and Decision-Making Process for a Cleaner Air: The Example of Particulate Air Pollution.

Symposium Organizers: J.-M. Rambaud,* R. Mills,† and G. Fumarola‡ *Association pour la Prévention de la Pollution Atmosphérique; †International Union of Air Pollution Prevention Associations; and ‡Eurpoean Federation of Clean Air Association

Introduction:

Created in 1999, the Air Pollution and Health European Information System (APHEIS) (www.apheis.net) seeks to meet the information needs of individuals and organizations concerned with the impact of air pollution on health on the European national and local levels. APHEIS is cofunded by the EC's Directorate General of Health and Consumer Protection and by APHEIS' partners.

Objectives:

Besides providing the latest findings in its ongoing assessment of the impact of air pollution on health in 31 cities in 18 European countries, APHEIS investigated how to reach individuals who make and influence policy on air pollution and health in Europe, and how to deliver APHEIS' findings to them efficiently.

Methods:

APHEIS interviewed 32 individuals who influence or set policy on air pollution and health in the United Kingdom, Spain, and the European Commission, and who are active in the fields of public health and the environment.

Results: This work produced a model that shows who the key players are in the policy-making process; how information flows between them; what types of information scientific and policy users active in the process each require; and what the best forms are in which to deliver this content to them to ensure maximum understanding and use of the information APHEIS produces.

Our research showed in particular that:

* Policy advisors and makers are generally unlikely to use the scientific reports we develop as is, contrary to scientists.

* Each of our 2 audiences of scientific and policy users has different problems to solve, different ways of processing information, and different levels of scientific knowledge and different cultures, meaning each audience has different information needs.

* A long, complex chain comprising many players leads from the scientists to whom we distribute our reports directly, and who use them, to the policy-makers who ultimately have the greatest effect on public health but who only receive our reports indirectly and use them rarely, if at all.

Based on this evidence, we concluded that APHEIS needed to act proactively to:

* Apply this knowledge to the way it shapes and delivers its information and messages; and

* Develop a range of communications tools that goes beyond our comprehensive scientific reports whose focus, content; and form are tailored to the separate information needs of scientific and policy users.

Conclusion:

Taking these steps will greatly enhance the way APHEIS communicates with the key audiences that set policy on air pollution in Europe.