Communication science for advancing policy implementation—the case of climate change

You might wonder, what does climate change have to do with cancer? There are actually many direct and indirect effects of climate change that impact individual and population-level health across the cancer control continuum (Nogueira et al. 2020). For example, climate change-related weather events can increase exposures to cancer risk factors, reduce food access and nutritional quality, impede health behaviors, and disrupt cancer care delivery, such as routine cancer screenings and even cancer treatment. Populations disproportionately burdened by cancer are also those at greatest risk of harm from climate change, which can exacerbate health disparities (Smith et al. 2022). Yet, in the United States, awareness about the risks of climate change to human health remains fairly low, as demonstrated by results from the 2022 NCI Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) (Muro et al. 2024). This is where communication science, in coordination with implementation science, can play a role in the policy implementation process (Emmons et al. 2021). Increasing knowledge and awareness about climate change can lead to the increased public engagement and public support needed to advance climate-friendly policy support and implementation (Campbell et al. 2023, Khatibi et al. 2021).

As climate change communication becomes an increasingly well-studied area, key lessons on how to communicate about climate change and health have come into view (Peters et al. 2022):

• Source matters. Scientists and environmental groups are often viewed as trusted sources of reliable scientific information about climate change (Cologna et al. 2020). (However, we must not overlook other effective climate change communication sources. Familiar and trusted sources like local meteorologists and healthcare professionals can also play a role in climate communication [Maibach et al. 2016, Maibach et al. 2021]). On the other hand, partisan sources are often polarizing when communicating with the public (Jasny et al. 2015).
• Visual images are effective. Images are more attention grabbing and tend to evoke more emotion than plain text alone. In the case of climate change, visual imagery, such as images of a flood or the aftermath of a wildfire, can allow the public to better connect with climate change content and has been shown to increase intention to contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts and support climate-related policy (O’Neill et al. 2013).
• Balance scientific information and statistics with narrative communication. When deciding how to present information about how climate change may harm health, it’s tempting to display statistics without thinking about how best to communicate their meaning in a way that both attracts attention and is easily understood. But statistics alone are often not enough. Narrative communication is what allows people to place those numbers in the context of their own lives and worldviews. Given increasing personal experience with climate-related extreme weather events, personal stories can increase audience engagement and have been found  to shift climate change beliefs and risk perceptions (Gustafson et al. 2020).

Integrating best practices from communication science into implementation science could optimize the uptake and dissemination of climate change adaptation and mitigation interventions. Further, it could improve public engagement and identify trusted sources to advance climate-friendly policy implementation. The effects of climate change on human health are intensifying, and therefore applying the principles of communication science to climate adaptation and mitigation efforts is critical to making real-world change.