Famine Response Needs Better Science Communication

In this editorial on the SciDev.Net website, writer David Dickson argues that the 2011 Horn of Africa drought exposes continuing gaps between "our ability to predict disaster and to take effective humanitarian action." According to the article, despite predictions that a widescale shortage of food was highly likely, the overall humanitarian response was severely inadequate. The situation emphasises the gap between the rapidly increasing ability to predict disasters, thanks largely to advances in science and technology, and the capacity to generate the political will to carry out effective mitigation strategies. One important obstacle is that politicians often feel uncomfortable making decisions when the science is uncertain. Thus, the way that scientific evidence is communicated by researchers and journalists can make a big difference.

According to the article, scientists need better communication techniques to ensure that politicians are alerted to credible evidence of a looming humanitarian disaster. This must include ways of reassuring policymakers that, if predictions do not come true, they will not be rebuked for taking unnecessary (and potentially expensive) action. Journalists also need to engage politicians much better when reporting the scientific aspects of disasters to help ensure that timely action is taken. However, Dickson also points out that the problem is not simply one of communication. For example, Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET)'s food security alerts, one-page briefing documents, are "a model of precise, authoritative information directed at decision-makers." However, the challenge is to get decision-makers to accept and act on the information.

The article says that considerable research is being carried out on the ways that policymakers assimilate and use scientific evidence in the decision-making process. However, much more remains to be done, particularly where such evidence is uncertain, especially statistical evidence, which can be interpreted in different ways. Dickson says journalists have a key role to play in all of these processes. One of their tasks is to raise the alarm among policymakers and the public about impending disasters, providing that this is done in a responsible, evidence-based manner. Another is to find out from scientists and other stakeholders what the policy options are and to ensure that politicians are aware of them. Journalists are also in a good position to monitor whether politicians are taking action and to expose those who fail to do so. Each of these tasks requires confidence in reporting on evidence that may lack certainty. But a lack of responsible reporting or of effective communication about impending disasters may translate into a lack of mitigating action by politicians, with potentially devastating consequences.