Information Ecosystem Preparedness for Health Emergency Response: What Can We Do Now to Communicate Better in the Next Crisis

"The importance of communication in preparing for and responding to health emergencies has long been recognized by public health experts and authorities."



This report, published by Internews, shares the findings of a study that explores the current gaps in information ecosystem preparedness for health emergencies as it relates to the roles played by the main actors: health system stakeholders, humanitarian organisations, media organisations, and community actors. Focusing on the Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali, and South Sudan, it analyses the obstacles hindering cooperation and identifies strategies that will contribute to effective risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) in health emergencies. Overall, the research underscores the need for a healthier information ecosystem that is better prepared to face health emergencies, ultimately enhancing overall preparedness.



As explained in the report, "The detrimental effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, along with heightened risks increasing the potential for future health emergencies, have prompted a collective reevaluation of health emergency preparedness from various perspectives. International agencies, heads of states, and the public health community are deeply engaged in reassessing the role of health in global security and preparedness structures. In such conversations, the role of communication and infodemic management has been highlighted to ensure people have access to timely, accurate, and evidence-based information that supports also building trust in public health systems and authorities."



The report notes that there is a need for more robust measures to address the negative impacts of infodemics, including health-related misinformation, disinformation, hate speech, and disease-related stigmatisation. The report also recognises the crucial role of timely, accurate, and evidence-based information in building trust in public health systems and authorities. However, it argues that more needs to be done to build trust, and that effort this requires sustained and adequate structures that go beyond standalone "information-based interventions" and that consider longer-term, ecosystem-building approaches.



The report defines information ecosystem (IE) preparedness for health emergencies as "building resilience for health communicators and information response actors ahead of the hazardous event, identifying gaps in capacities, systems, processes and structures and finding relevant solutions that are community-led and sustainable in time. This will ultimately ensure actors and networks can function collectively in the face of health-threatening events."



The research conducted in the three African countries is guided by three main objectives:

1. To deepen understanding of the diverse challenges and gaps faced by IE actors to be better prepared for a health emergency;
2. To identify the obstacles hindering cooperation for strengthened preparedness capacity in information responses during a health emergency; and
3. To identify strategies, approaches, and interventions that can contribute to a healthier IE that is better prepared to face a health emergency, contributing ultimately to greater preparedness.

The first section of the report presents the preparedness gaps faced by each IE actor in responding effectively to a health emergency. For example, for health systems stakeholders, the gaps identified are: weak data-sharing systems, insufficient RCCE coordination across health systems, challenges in interactions with decision-makers, limited capacity to address misinformation, and outdated communication strategies. For the media sector, the main gaps identified are: limited expertise in health journalism, inadequate funding for prevention and emergency preparedness, and limited infodemic management systems.



The second section of the report presents the barriers encountered in the interaction and cooperation between these actors, especially regarding their RCCE. It looks, for example, at the relationships between health system stakeholders and humanitarian organisations, health system stakeholders and community actors, humanitarian organisations and community actors, and media organisations and all other actors. The report delves into each relationship and emphasises the primary obstacles that hinder strengthened preparedness in the dynamics of information exchange, coordination, and collective response. Key areas of concern within each relationship are emphasised, and the impacts this has on the broader ecosystem are discussed. Particular attention is paid to gaps in preparedness planning and the relationships between actors beyond the emergency.



Looking just at the relationships of the different actors with the media: The relationship between health system stakeholders and media organisations is characterised by continued suspicions, lack of access to expert health information, and inadequate engagement. These factors can impact the ability of media to support health literacy/disease prevention and can lead to information provided by media to be de-contextualised, untimely, inaccurate, or irrelevant to their audiences. In addition, the relationship barriers between media organisations and humanitarian organisations are characterised by lack of coordination spaces and missed opportunities for collaboration around community information needs. The impact of this situation is that without access to experts, the media is unable to contextualise information and struggles to understand decision-making - resulting in fragmented or incomplete coverage of health emergencies. Furthermore, without common spaces for regularly exchanging information and building trusting relations, the media struggle to position themselves as relevant partners in the RCCE field.



In conclusion, the report focuses on the common areas of concern identified from the analysis of the gaps and barriers, and it offers a series of recommendations to address along four key elements of health emergency preparedness: (i) governance, coordination, and collaboration, (ii) information management and planning, (iii) capacity building, and (iv) funding for IE preparedness. The following are just a few of the recommendations:

• Governance, coordination, and collaboration
  • IE preparedness should be integrated into national strategies for emergency preparedness, including financing - with a focus on local IE preparedness.
  • Community engagement should be integrated into governance, coordination, and partnership building, with civil society organisations (CSOs) being part of decision-making at all jurisdictional levels.
• Information management and planning
  • Collective data systems should be established to compile social listening data, and inform actors about rumours, concerns, or questions circulating within the community.
  • Mechanisms should be in place to conduct assessments of IE preparedness, with a special focus on the gaps of local media and CSOs.
• Capacity building
  • The media should invest in systems that monitor misinformation circulating among audiences and establish internal processes for fact checking with systematic access to local health experts and reliable sources.
  • IE actors should be trained in complex technical areas of public health, including health system functioning, communicable diseases management, and prevention or decision-making in emergency interventions. This way, IE actors will be better prepared to communicate and interpret authorities' decisions during emergencies.
• Funding
  • There is a need for longer-term funding, either through domestic budgets or foreign aid, to strengthen and sustain national RCCE capacities that enhance preparedness plans and integrate IE strengthening as a fundamental element. Relying on one-off information interventions or health campaigns won't foster resilient information landscapes. This need includes long-term funding for local media.
  • Funds for content creation and communication should be prioritised for actors operating at the local level.

Click here for the 38-page report in PDF format in French.