new ideas for communication -...
TRANSCRIPT
Vilnius, 15 September 2017
New ideas for communication –plain language summaries
Bernd Elzer & Simon TerryEuropean Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
The EFSA context
Plain Language Summaries
Benchmarking Templates & consultation
Conclusions
Next steps
OUTLINE
The EFSA context
EFSA AT A GLANCE
> 450 staff
> 1 500 experts
1 000 meetings/year
500 outputs a year
in Parma (founded in 2002)
WHAT EFSA DOES
Provides independent scientific advice for EU risk managers and policy makers on food and feed safety
Provides independent, timely risk communication
Promotes scientific cooperation
EFSA’S MANDATE IS TO
Food and feed
safety advice to its
partners, stakeholders and the
public at large in a clear
and accessible
way.
WITH WHOM?
POLICY MAKERS
CONCERNED INDIVIDUALS
STAKEHOLDERS
SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY
RISK MANAGERS
RISK ASSESSORS
MEDIAPARTNERS
efsa
HOW?
EFSA JOURNAL
Plain Language Summaries
11
WHY PLS?
• EFSA outputs are highly technical, inaccessible • Some SHs may have little scientific expertise
at their disposal
Bridging the gap
• Key priority: non-technical summaries
EFSA Journal user survey
• Engage EFSA scientific staff in the risk communication process
• Make scientific outputs more accessible
Spin-off effect on science
12
WHAT ARE PLS?
• Increasingly used by scientific organisations• Found to support accessibility, usability and sharing
of information
Brief, jargon-free syntheses of scientific outputs written for non-technical or lay audiences
13
PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE – FROM FACTSHEET TO PLS
14
THE PLS PROJECT – OBJECTIVES
Benchmarking
16
PLS – A VARIETY OF APPROACHES
• varied, but mostly mirroring science abstracts• detailed guidance, templates, checklists
Content & structure
• mostly text-based, with trends towards more innovative forms (videos, infographics, SoMe)
Format & dissemination
• internal vs external• involvement of both science & comms experts• involvement of target readers in drafting/review
Production
17
PLS – USEFUL BUT RESOURCE-INTENSIVE
• increase understandability, usefulness, accessibility
• wider audience reach, enhanced re-usability, increased consistency
Advantages
• over-simplification, patronisation• resource-intensive• lengthy approval process
Disadvantages
• on transparency, engagement, health• BUT: no formal assessment of impact
Positive impact
+
-
!
18
PLS – RECENT TRENDS
• shorter and more structured guidance• based on target audience research and testing
Guidance
• text-based PLS prevail (news story format, interview style)
• evolving formats better suited for web (podcasts, videos, infographics, data viz)
Content, format, dissemination
• automated PLS written by computers• computer generated visuals and maps
Generation
Templates & consultation
20
DEVELOPMENT OF TEMPLATES
For different readers & outputs types
Abstract structure (400-700 words)
Modular approach (basic to complex)
21
MODULAR APPROACH
Elements Basic Complex (with visual)
[Title][Section headings][Coloured box]
Background (with additional info onscientific context)
What work did EFSA carry out? (with additional info on how
EFSA reached its conclusions)What were EFSA’s conclusions?Other organisations’ findings[Visuals]Want more info?Glossary (optional)
22
CONSULTATION
23
LIMITATIONS
•No feedback from EC & EP•Some groups underrepresented•Consumers only from one country
Audience
•PLS tested only for one topic•Only one type of visualTemplate
•Full implications not examined•Nor comparative (dis-)advantagesImpact
Conclusions & recommendations
25
BASIC VS COMPLEX TEMPLATE
• Abstract type structure valued positively• Lack of headings is an issue for lay readers• Recommendation: improve structure
Basic template
• Overall length & additional elements valued positively across all groups
• Some variation in terms of preferences• Uncertainty may need more explanation
Complex template
26
VISUALS & DISSEMINATION
• Help interpret, understand and remember info• Mixed views on function /content of pictures • Their use to describe complex info may have
resource implications
Visuals
• Benchmarking: different approaches• Consultation: no clear preference –
industry prefers PLS within scientific output, consumers prefer them separate
• Recommendation: adapt PLS dissemination approach based on intended audience
Where should PLS be found?
?
27
MAIN CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Complex format with visuals would work for all groups
Production of different formats for different audiences not efficient
Resource-intensive process, requires mediating audience needs
Modular template is effective, but could be marginally improved
PLS are a useful tool to help lay readers understand complex info
Next steps
29
NEXT STEPS
• Evaluate report• Fine-tune modelQ3 2017
• Small pilot• RecommendationsQ4 2017
• Larger pilot2018
30
THANK YOU!
Questions?
Comments?
Experiences to share?
Let’s discuss!