IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v4y2018i1d10.1057_s41599-018-0121-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Winners and losers: communicating the potential impacts of policies

Author

Listed:
  • Cameron Brick

    (University of Cambridge)

  • Alexandra L. J. Freeman

    (University of Cambridge)

  • Steven Wooding

    (University of Cambridge)

  • William J. Skylark

    (University of Cambridge)

  • Theresa M. Marteau

    (University of Cambridge)

  • David J. Spiegelhalter

    (University of Cambridge)

Abstract

Individual decision-makers need communications that succinctly describe potential harms and benefits of different options, but policymakers or citizens evaluating a policy are rarely given a balanced and easily understood summary of the potential outcomes of their decision. We review current policy option communication across diverse domains such as taxes, health, climate change, and international trade, followed by reviews of guidance and evidence for communication effectiveness. Our conceptual synthesis identifies four characteristics of policy options that make their communication particularly difficult: heterogeneous impacts on different segments of the population, multiple outcomes, long timescales, and large uncertainties. For communicators that are trying to inform rather than persuade, these complexities reveal a core tension between issue coverage and comprehensibility. We find little empirical evidence for how to communicate policy options effectively. We identify promising current communications, analyze them based on the above synthesis, and suggest priorities for future research. Recognizing the particular challenges of balanced, effective policy option communications could lead to better guidelines and support for policy decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Cameron Brick & Alexandra L. J. Freeman & Steven Wooding & William J. Skylark & Theresa M. Marteau & David J. Spiegelhalter, 2018. "Winners and losers: communicating the potential impacts of policies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:4:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-018-0121-9
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-018-0121-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-018-0121-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-018-0121-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian D Bishop & Christopher J Pettit & Falak Sheth & Subhash Sharma, 2013. "Evaluation of Data Visualisation Options for Land-Use Policy and Decision Making in Response to Climate Change," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(2), pages 213-233, April.
    2. David Budescu & Han-Hui Por & Stephen Broomell, 2012. "Effective communication of uncertainty in the IPCC reports," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 181-200, July.
    3. Niro Sivanathan & Hemant Kakkar, 2017. "The unintended consequences of argument dilution in direct-to-consumer drug advertisements," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(11), pages 797-802, November.
    4. David R. Rovner & Celia E. Wills & Vence Bonham & Gilbert Williams & Janet Lillie & Karen Kelly-Blake & Mark V. Williams & Margaret Holmes-Rovner, 2004. "Decision Aids for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Applicability across Race and Education," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 24(4), pages 359-366, August.
    5. Eric R. Stone & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Abigail M. Wilkins & Emily M. Boker & Jacqueline MacDonald Gibson, 2017. "Designing Graphs to Communicate Risks: Understanding How the Choice of Graphical Format Influences Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(4), pages 612-628, April.
    6. Paul Cairney & Richard Kwiatkowski, 2017. "How to communicate effectively with policymakers: combine insights from psychology and policy studies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 1-8, December.
    7. Claire Glenton & Nancy Santesso & Sarah Rosenbaum & Elin Strømme Nilsen & Tamara Rader & Agustin Ciapponi & Helen Dilkes, 2010. "Presenting the Results of Cochrane Systematic Reviews to a Consumer Audience: A Qualitative Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(5), pages 566-577, September.
    8. Rosemarie McMahon & Michael Stauffacher & Reto Knutti, 2015. "The unseen uncertainties in climate change: reviewing comprehension of an IPCC scenario graph," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 133(2), pages 141-154, November.
    9. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Eric R. Stone & Jacqueline MacDonald Gibson & Paul S. Fischbeck & Mohammad Baradaran Shoraka, 2013. "The effect of communication design and recipients' numeracy on responses to UXO risk," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(8), pages 981-1004, September.
    10. Penelope Beynon & Marie Gaarder & Christelle Chapoy & Edoardo Masset, 2012. "Passing on the Hot Potato: Lessons from a Policy Brief Experiment," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 68-75, September.
    11. David V. Budescu & Han-Hui Por & Stephen B. Broomell & Michael Smithson, 2014. "The interpretation of IPCC probabilistic statements around the world," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(6), pages 508-512, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Reynolds, J.P. & Archer, S. & Pilling, M. & Kenny, M. & Hollands, G.J. & Marteau, T.M., 2019. "Public acceptability of nudging and taxing to reduce consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and food: A population-based survey experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Heather Hodges & Colin Kuehl & Sarah E. Anderson & Phillip J. Ehret & Cameron Brick, 2020. "How Managers Can Reduce Household Water Use Through Communication: A Field Experiment," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1076-1099, September.
    3. Reynolds, J.P. & Pilling, M. & Marteau, T.M., 2018. "Communicating quantitative evidence of policy effectiveness and support for the policy: Three experimental studies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 1-12.
    4. Mantzari, Eleni & Reynolds, James P. & Jebb, Susan A. & Hollands, Gareth J. & Pilling, Mark A. & Marteau, Theresa M., 2022. "Public support for policies to improve population and planetary health: A population-based online experiment assessing impact of communicating evidence of multiple versus single benefits," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    5. Axford, Nick & Morpeth, Louise & Bjornstad, Gretchen & Hobbs, Tim & Berry, Vashti, 2022. "“What works” registries of interventions to improve child and youth psychosocial outcomes: A critical appraisal," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    6. Frederiksen, Marianne Harbo & Wolf, Patricia & Klotz, Ute, 2024. "Citizen visions of drone uses and impacts in 2057: Far-future insights for policy decision-makers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    7. Bonomi Bezzo, Franco, 2021. "Universal Independence Income. A EUROMOD Utopian Simulation in the UK," EUROMOD Working Papers EM3/21, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. P A Hancock & William G Volante, 2020. "Quantifying the qualities of language," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-27, May.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:363-393 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Michael D. Gerst & Melissa A. Kenney & Irina Feygina, 2021. "Improving the usability of climate indicator visualizations through diagnostic design principles," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-22, June.
    4. repec:wrk:wrkemf:22 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Richard S. J. Tol, 2016. "The Impacts Of Climate Change According To The Ipcc," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Adam J. L. Harris & Han-Hui Por & Stephen B. Broomell, 2017. "Anchoring climate change communications," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 387-398, February.
    7. Ian G. J. Dawson, 2018. "Assessing the Effects of Information About Global Population Growth on Risk Perceptions and Support for Mitigation and Prevention Strategies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(10), pages 2222-2241, October.
    8. Yasmina Okan & Eric R. Stone & Wändi Bruine de Bruin, 2018. "Designing Graphs that Promote Both Risk Understanding and Behavior Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 929-946, May.
    9. Arjan Wardekker & Susanne Lorenz, 2019. "The visual framing of climate change impacts and adaptation in the IPCC assessment reports," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 273-292, September.
    10. Mark J. Hurlstone & Susie Wang & Annabel Price & Zoe Leviston & Iain Walker, 2017. "Cooperation studies of catastrophe avoidance: implications for climate negotiations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 119-133, January.
    11. Yasmina Okan & Eric R. Stone & Jonathan Parillo & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Andrew M. Parker, 2020. "Probability Size Matters: The Effect of Foreground‐Only versus Foreground+Background Graphs on Risk Aversion Diminishes with Larger Probabilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 771-788, April.
    12. David R. Mandel & Daniel Irwin, 2021. "Facilitating sender-receiver agreement in communicated probabilities: Is it best to use words, numbers or both?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 363-393, March.
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:5:p:445-465 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Minal Pathak & Joyashree Roy & Shaurya Patel & Shreya Some & Purvi Vyas & Nandini Das & Priyadarshi Shukla, 2021. "Communicating climate change findings from IPCC reports: insights from outreach events in India," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-14, October.
    15. Jordan Harold & Irene Lorenzoni & Thomas F. Shipley & Kenny R. Coventry, 2020. "Communication of IPCC visuals: IPCC authors’ views and assessments of visual complexity," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 255-270, January.
    16. Casey Helgeson & Richard Bradley & Brian Hill, 2018. "Combining probability with qualitative degree-of-certainty metrics in assessment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 517-525, August.
    17. Marie Juanchich & Theodore G. Shepherd & Miroslav Sirota, 2020. "Negations in uncertainty lexicon affect attention, decision-making and trust," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1677-1698, October.
    18. Marie Juanchich & Amélie Gourdon-Kanhukamwe & Miroslav Sirota, 2017. "“I am uncertain†vs “It is uncertain†. How linguistic markers of the uncertainty source affect uncertainty communication," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(5), pages 445-465, September.
    19. Temilade Sesan & Willie Siyanbola, 2021. "“These are the realities”: insights from facilitating researcher-policymaker engagement in Nigeria’s household energy sector," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    20. Evelina Trutnevyte & Céline Guivarch & Robert Lempert & Neil Strachan, 2016. "Reinvigorating the scenario technique to expand uncertainty consideration," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 373-379, April.
    21. Reem A Mustafa & Wojtek Wiercioch & Nancy Santesso & Adrienne Cheung & Barbara Prediger & Tejan Baldeh & Alonso Carrasco-Labra & Romina Brignardello-Petersen & Ignacio Neumann & Patrick Bossuyt & Amit, 2015. "Decision-Making about Healthcare Related Tests and Diagnostic Strategies: User Testing of GRADE Evidence Tables," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-12, October.
    22. Rosalind Pidcock & Kate Heath & Lydia Messling & Susie Wang & Anna Pirani & Sarah Connors & Adam Corner & Christopher Shaw & Melissa Gomis, 2021. "Evaluating effective public engagement: local stories from a global network of IPCC scientists," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-22, October.
    23. Melissa A. Kenney & Anthony C. Janetos, 2020. "National indicators of climate changes, impacts, and vulnerability," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(4), pages 1695-1704, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:4:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-018-0121-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.