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!