Abstract
In a world facing increasing social and environmental impacts from natural hazards, the efficacy of risk communication rests on its ability to translate information into actionable knowledge. Disaster preparedness and resilience demand collaboration between governments, emergency services, NGOs, and the community. Boundary organisations have demonstrated success in facilitating such collaboration in health and environmental settings. However, their role in disaster preparedness is less established. Although the importance of communication within boundary organisations is theoretically well recognised, empirical understanding of what is communicated, how it is communicated, and the resulting impacts remains limited.
This applied research addresses these gaps, examining boundary organisations as conduits for risk communication through an evaluative case study of New Zealand’s AF8 [Alpine Fault Magnitude 8] programme. Established in 2016 to build awareness and preparedness for a high-probability M8+ earthquake on the Alpine Fault, AF8 is a collaborative initiative designed to bridge hazard science, policy, and practice. While anecdotal consensus suggests the programme has elevated awareness of the risk among the South Island emergency management sector, the programme’s specific communication strategies and impacts remain unexplored. Given the fault line was identified decades prior to AF8’s inception, the programme presents a unique opportunity to examine the specific communication approaches that support the shift from information to actionable knowledge at the interface of science, policy, and practice.
The case study’s mixed methods approach began with an exploratory survey of the South Island emergency management sector. This provided general insight into the sector’s perceptions of the programme’s communication and its efficacy and informed the design of subsequent data collection methods. This was followed by thematic document analysis of 14 of AF8’s communication artefacts, examining the specific approaches taken to communicate the Alpine Fault risk. A suite of interviews with 34 emergency management stakeholders provided qualitative insight into how communication was perceived as well as the programme’s impacts within the sector. These were thematically analysed using template analysis and considered both tangible and intangible impacts including conceptual (changes in knowledge, understanding, and emotion); instrumental (planning, resourcing, behaviour change); network and relational impacts; capacity-building; and attitudinal shifts towards cross-boundary collaboration.
Findings reveal how AF8’s communication approaches aligned with and diverged from existing theory, demonstrating the plurality of risk communication theory in practice. Rather than relying solely on technical data, AF8 successfully balanced credible scientific evidence with an affective, experiential understanding of risk. Framing the risk with certainty shifted the risk from a statistical probability to an inevitable event. While this inevitability heightened stakeholders’ anxiety, it was balanced by messages of agency and expressed positivity towards the benefits the faultline has brought to the landscape. By integrating relational engagement that facilitated connection, with transmissive forms of communication to reach a wider audience, the programme illustrates the reinforcing value of both approaches in building preparedness.
The research provides empirical evidence for the constitutive role of communication in resilience, positioning boundary work as a site where this occurs. AF8 improved awareness of the Alpine Fault risk within the emergency management sector, elevating its importance across the South Island and nationally as a priority for local and central government and other agencies involved in emergency management planning and response. By making earthquake science relevant and accessible across the sector, the programme expanded the reach of the risk message as audiences became communicators, sharing knowledge within their own networks. Critical awareness grew, relationships were strengthened, and networks developed. Although AF8’s goal of facilitating inter-regional planning has not yet been fully realised, hazard planning has advanced within many organisations across the sector and the social capital required for future inter-agency collaboration has been strengthened.
Based on theoretical principles and empirical evidence generated by this research, the Re4 Framework for communicating hazard risk is presented. This framework is structured around four key dimensions of communication - reliable, relatable, retellable, and relational. Central to the framework are boundary spanners, individuals who operate as strategic communicators navigating the complexity of cross-boundary collaboration to align scientific and practitioner knowledge. Designed to bridge the gap between theory and practice, the framework provides guidance for risk communicators working across science-policy-practice boundaries to design and implement communication that moves beyond informing about risk to actively support preparedness and resilience in the face of increasing global disaster risks.