Developing Messages about Humanitarian and Development Assistance

1
Developing Messages about Humanitarian and
Development Assistance

• Version Presented at 4/26/04 Meeting
• Lake Snell Perry Associates

2
Introduction

• Lake Snell Perry Associates reviewed polling
  data and message testing studies occurring from
  2002 to 2004.
• The goal is to learn how to create effective
  messages that can have broad appeal and that
  motivate Americans to actively support
  humanitarian and development assistance.
• This presentation is largely based on research
  with attentive Americans who are likely voters
  not necessarily average Americans.

3
Context

• Studies show that the economy and jobs are the
  publics top concerns, while the War in Iraq and
  terrorism/security are their leading global
  concerns.
• Americans feel less secure today. Women are
  particularly effected.
• Concern about Americas image in the world we
  are perceived as a bully.
• Believe the US should help poor countries, but
  concerned about cost and effectiveness.
• Perceive charitable organizations are most
  effective at providing assistance.

4
Reality Check

• Americans have a domestic focus economy, jobs
  global issues other than Iraq and terrorism are
  much less relevant.
• There is a Take Care of Home First mentality
  among the majority.
• Most do not want the US to be the only global
  leader prefer partnering with other countries.
• Most think US government gives much more in
  humanitarian and development assistance than it
  actually does.
• Many are not sure assistance has been successful.
  They worry about corruption most doubt
  assistance makes it to the people in need.
• Growing wary of fundraising campaigns that play
  on guilt.
• Most feel they are too busy to get involved in
  another cause.

5
Also a Time of Opportunity

• Many trends are coming together. Many understand
  the US cannot ignore what goes on in the world.
  More Americans paying attention to global
  issues.
• Americans are worried about the US image problem.
  Security concerns could provide an entry.
• Also compelled by moral, compassionate, and
  faith-based reasons to help developing countries
  and people in need, particularly children.
• Most also see that humanitarian/development
  assistance serves our self-interest by making the
  world more stable and self-sufficient, calming
  resentments toward the US, improving global
  health, and protecting the environment.
• Many feel it is possible to make a difference on
  many global issues most do not feel powerless.

6
Messengers/Trusted Global Actors

• Public looks to a wide range of actors on global
  issues
• Several messengers are seen as credible.
• Not all of these work for every audience and
  every issue.

7
Audiences for Messages

• Many studies show that the best audiences for
  messages about humanitarian/ development
  assistance and global health are

8
Building Effective Messages
9
Positive Language
Across message testing studies, many approaches
and concepts consistently work well. These are

• Noting that the US already has the know-how to
  solve a problem and all we need to do is get it
  to developing countries
• Telling success stories
• Starting with a personal story and then quickly
  expanding to show how assistance ultimately
  benefited an entire community or even country
• Helping individuals and communities help
  themselves
• Addressing root causes like poverty and hunger
• Focusing on people not dollars
• Quotes from credible sources (Colin Powell for
  some, Jimmy Carter for others)
• Talking about a mix of short-term and long-term
  assistance (people understand some problems take
  longer to address)

• Positive, hopeful language
• Focusing on children in a positive way
• US involved in partnerships/coalitions
• Using the word together
• Teaching basic skills
• Educating/raising awareness about a problem
• Action now to prevent a bigger problem later
• Acknowledging Americans as a caring and
  compassionate people willing to help the worlds
  poor
• Using words likeeffective and accountable
• Facts from credible organizations (CDC, WHO, GAO,
  UNICEF)
• Tangible goals to assistance

10
Negative Language

• Concepts that do not work well
• Using the term foreign aid or even just
  foreign which makes it seem less relevant
  better to say humanitarian and development
  assistance.
• Strongly asserting that the US has a moral duty
  or obligation to help poor countries i.e.,
  most Americans actually believe this is true but
  they do not like seeing this statement in
  messages (it seems scolding)
• Explaining the US gives less assistance than
  other countries (not believable) or implying the
  US does not do its share (counterintuitive).
  Indeed, there is no value in playing the numbers
  game. People easily talk themselves out of their
  concern or surprise at the low amount the US
  dedicates to humanitarian and development
  assistance.
• Programs that appear to impose US values and
  culture on developing countries Americans want
  to be sensitive to cultural norms (e.g.,
  reproductive health, girls/womens rights).
• Using images of suffering children is perceived
  to be manipulative, guilt-inducing.
• Only asking for a financial donation better to
  also mention other ways people can get involved.
• Over idealistic or dramatic language such as
  ending poverty which most Americans do not
  believe is possible.
• Trying to shame Americans implying they are
  passive while people in developing countries
  suffer and die does not work. The reason
  Americans perceive themselves to be a generous
  and caring people, not passive. Also, many
  people are already doing something through their
  churches, schools, and by making donations to
  global causes.

11
Message Construct

• The most effective messages tend to have these
  components
• Description of the problem with credible facts
  that reflects peoples top values (e.g. helping
  children, enhancing stability, improving health)
• Solution to problem and US role in that
• Actions steps someone can take to help solve the
  problem
• Messages seem to get a positive bump if they
  mention children, have a goal of
  self-sufficiency, use education as the means to
  solving the problem, show that NGOs are working
  on this problem in coalitions or partnerships,
  and identify a range of action steps for
  individuals.

12
Operational Values Education and
Self-Sufficiency

• If possible, messages regardless of topic
  (e.g.,hunger and poverty, AIDS orphans, improving
  health) should include elements of education and
  self-sufficiency.
• Messages about helping people in developing
  countries help themselves always score better
  because self-sufficiency is the desired goal of
  all foreign assistance. It is the driving
  American value when it comes to humanitarian and
  development assistance.
• Education that is culturally sensitive is how
  Americans prefer to help poor countries sharing
  our know how and technology with others. The
  contrast is just giving money or food to
  developing countries which most Americans do not
  support (unless it is for disaster relief
  purposes)

13
Powerful Themes for Messages

• The following themes tend to get broad based
  support and open the door to a range of
  interventions both short-term and long-term
  that the public will support
• Helping children
• Reducing hunger
• Increasing global stability (thereby making the
  US safer)
• Reducing poverty
• Improving global health
• Improving education/schools
• Increasing self-sufficiency

14
Other Top Themes

• These themes also score well in polls but may not
  lead to such broad based support because they
  are new and the public still needs to learn about
  them the public tends to see them as more narrow
  or requiring short-term interventions the public
  prefers a broader scope to foreign assistance or
  the public lacks urgency.
• Disaster relief
• Improving the lives of women and girls
• Addressing AIDS in Africa
• Helping AIDS orphans
• Improving the environment

15
Some Messages Need to be Targeted

• Some themes work well with targeted audiences but
  put off others. These need to be treated
  carefully, but can be effective in the proper
  circumstances
• Reproductive health (conservatives tend to have
  problems due to abortion concerns)
• Teaching job skills (some feel we will be
  exporting jobs)
• Refugee assistance (some backlash due to
  immigration concerns)
• Explicit references to preventing terrorism (many
  find this link too tenuous they say that the
  9/11 terrorists were wealthy and well-educated
  and not the kinds of people that aid targets.
  However, this may work on Capitol Hill.)

16
Specific Insights into

• Enhancing Stability
• Helping Children
• Reducing Hunger
• Improving Global Health

17
Humanitarian/Development Assistance Stability

• Studies show the publics top global concerns are
  currently security related. It follows that
  making the US safer is a top foreign policy goal.
• Recent studies show that linking humanitarian
  assistance to stability goals can make messages
  more powerful. That is, they test better than
  just straight development messages.
• Of note, few messages we found only focus on
  security and stability rather they tend to link
  security to more traditional goals of assistance
  (i.e., addressing hunger and poverty)
• However, the majority is doubtful that
  preventing terrorism can be achieved through
  humanitarian assistance. Thus, we do not
  recommend explicit references to terrorism in
  messages.
• It is also unclear that stability messages
  motivate people to take action as much as goals
  like improving childrens lives and
  self-sufficiency.

Bottom-Line Increasing stability offers a
possibly potent framework for discussing
humanitarian assistance, especially if this
reference is subtle. However, the research is
not definitive. Needs more testing against other
powerful messages. Also, there are signs the
public has some doubts about whether this goal is
achievable.
18
Helping Children

• Children tend to be the global group Americans
  care about most. They are seen as innocent
  victims who need our protection.
• Many also believe if we invest in children now,
  they are more likely to become self-sufficient
  adults.
• The challenge is that focusing on children can
  appear manipulative. Many have become wary
  because of old images of starving children,
  flies in their eyes, Sally Struthers, and
  requests for donations. These images may still
  work for some in terms of child sponsorship and
  donations, but may turn-off others from engaging
  long-term.

Bottom-Line Messages about helping children get
support across all groups. These messages need
to be hopeful, simple, include facts, and avoid
overly dramatic language. Keep in mind there is
some skepticism due to past ads that were seen as
guilt-inducing.
19
Reducing Hunger

• Hunger messages tend to score better than poverty
  messages, although these two topics are often
  linked in messages. It may work better to break
  out these themes.
• Addressing hunger consistently comes up near the
  top of reasons why the US should be involved in
  humanitarian and development assistance.
• Poverty and hunger have recently been linked with
  stability themes i.e., these are the root
  causes of desperation and instability in the
  world. Also often coupled with self-sufficiency
  goals.
• The challenge is that the public does not believe
  it is possible to eliminate hunger it is not
  believable. They will shut down when goals of
  assistance seem unachievable.
• Links to domestic hunger make messages even more
  powerful i.e., that you are seeking to reduce
  hunger here as well as in poor countries.

Bottom-Line It is possible to develop strong
messages about fighting hunger. This remains a
primary goal of humanitarian/development
assistance for the public. However, there are
challenges. These messages can seem old. Many
do not see that progress has been made. Also, do
not over promise in messages many do not
believe eliminating hunger is a realistic goal.
20
Improving Global Health

• Health is a positive framework to discuss
  humanitarian assistance global health is seen
  as a value in and of itself. Improving the
  health of children is particularly important
  Americans do not like hearing the large number of
  children who die from preventable diseases,
  orphaned by AIDS, etc.
• Vaccination programs, providing medications,
  helping communities have clean water, and health
  education programs are appealing.
• Messages about fighting AIDS are powerful.
  However, the public has limited understanding of
  other infectious diseases such as malaria. It
  takes a crisis like that seen with SARS to get
  the public to attend to these issues.
• The challenge is the public has big gaps in
  knowledge. Also find infectious diseases like
  SARS threatening can be challenging building
  messages around these themes. Lastly, domestic
  debate about healthcare and medications can
  derail the message.

Bottom-Line A variety of global health messages
score well, although messages about childrens
health score best. Big gaps in knowledge media
coverage is episodic and fear based SARS, West
Nile, Mad Cow, etc. AIDS dominate public health
concerns. Public needs to learn more.
21
Moving to Action
22
Is It Possible to Move People to Act?

• This is a gap in the polling research there is
  a need to show real action as a result of
  messages and campaigns.
• However, individual NGOs and others have
  experienced success in using grassroots efforts
  and other mobilizing techniques to prompt
  Americans to take specific actions. This
  presentation does not include those insights.
• It is also important to note that calls to action
  work best when targeted to an energized segment
  of the population whether that is frequent
  church goers or college students, it is best to
  target.
• Some studies reviewed show that messages can
  increase the number of people who say they are
  likely to take some action.
• Likelihood to take action is closely tied to
  efficacy can US assistance make a difference on
  a global problem? Can an individual make a
  difference?
• Of note, many studies show a strong sense of
  efficacy among Americans most feel that certain
  kinds of assistance can be very effective
  (disaster relief, basic education, teaching
  skills).

23
Is It Possible to Move People to Act?

• In the D.A.T.A. focus groups in April 2004
  messages that challenged Americans to do more
  and not stay on the sidelines while others
  suffer fell flat. It is important to note that
  many Americans may resist assertions that they
  are passive.
• Indeed, it is likely that many Americans already
  help poor countries through their churches,
  charitable donations, school projects, and other
  efforts. They are doing something.
• The challenge may be that they consider these
  efforts to be personal, private, and
  faith-related not political. There is a need
  to link these private actions to the political
  realm. They need to see that the problems are so
  large they require a greater commitment by the
  American government in addition to what
  individuals are doing.
• Thus, while Americans may have a strong sense of
  personal efficacy when in comes to those private,
  individual acts of charity, their sense of their
  political efficacy on these issues may be
  underdeveloped.

24
Better Safer World
Better Safer World (Sep/Dec 2003) found on a
number of measures Des Moines respondents said
they were more likely to take action after an ad
campaign/grassroots efforts. This project did a
before poll in September and a poll after the ad
campaign/grassroots efforts in December.

Percent very likely to take action.
25
Following are the detailed responses from that
pollNow I am going to read you a list of
actions that some people might take to help make
a difference in developing countries and for each
one please tell me how likely it is that you
would personally take that action.
Better Safer World
Post Survey change in Very Likely

• Urge Congress and other elected officials to
  fully fund the President's initiative to combat
  AIDS around the world.
• Urge Presidential candidates to sign a pledge to
  do more to fight world hunger.
• Donate 25 to help drill a well to provide clean
  drinking water and better health for a community
  in a developing country.
• Log on to a web site to learn what others are
  doing and get ideas for what you and your family
  can do in helping to build a better safer world.
  
• Sign a petition supporting efforts to fight world
  hunger and poverty.
• Make a personal contribution to an effective
  non-governmental organization working to fight
  poverty and hunger in developing countries

26
Better Safer World
The poll found that not only were Des Moines
respondents more likely to take action, they were
also more likely to think actions matter. In
particular, there was an increase in their
feelings about the efficacy of contacting
Congress and the Presidential candidates.
Percent who think very likely action will help
people.
27
Following are the detailed responses from that
pollNow I am going to read you a list of
actions that some people might take to help make
a difference in developing countries and for each
one please tell me how likely it is that this
action would help people in poor and developing
countries,- very likely, somewhat likely, not
very likely, or not at all likely
Better Safer World
Post Survey of Change

• Urge Presidential candidates to sign a pledge to
  do more to fight world hunger.
• Urge Congress and other elected officials to
  fully fund the President's initiative to combat
  AIDS around the world.
• Make a personal contribution to an effective
  non-governmental organization working to fight
  poverty and hunger in developing countries
• Donate 25 to help drill a well to provide clean
  drinking water and better health for a community
  in a developing country.
• Sign a petition supporting efforts to fight world
  hunger and poverty.
• Log on to a web site to learn what others are
  doing and get ideas for what you and your family
  can do in helping to build a better safer world.

28
In a three-month period the Better Safer World
website went from a brand new website to a site
averaging 630 page views a day and about 57
unique visitors per day. This is an indicator
that the public can be driven to a website on
humanitarian/development assistance through the
use of PR, advertising, news coverage, and on the
ground activities.
Better Safer World

• Page views
• Average of page views per day
• Average number of page views per unique visitor
• Total number of unique visitors
• Visitors with one visit
• Visitors with more than one visit

58,023 630 11 4,433 3,599 834
29
Other Insights Into Action and Efficacy

• InterAction (Dec 2003) found that voters
  acknowledge that some of their goals for foreign
  assistance may not be achievable. While
  preventing terrorism is their top foreign
  assistance goal (80), they believe that foreign
  assistance can be more effective achieving other
  kinds of goals like disaster relief, teaching
  basic skills, promoting education, and feeding
  the hungry.
• WGBH (Jan 2004) found that most people disagree
  that the worlds health problems are too
  difficult to solve (65 disagree). The survey
  also found that 53 disagree that what they do in
  their own life does not impact what happens to
  other people around the world, while 45 agree
  with this statement.
• Better Safer World (Dec 2003) found that most
  people disagree with the notion that there is
  nothing they can do to help poor and developing
  countries (70 disagree in pre-campaign poll 77
  disagree in post-campaign poll) the ad campaign
  and grassroots efforts actually increased the
  sense of efficacy on these issues for Des Moines
  residents.

30
Challenges and Conflicts in the Data
31
US Foreign Assistance Budget

• Here is what the polls say
• WGBH poll (Jan 2004) found that 73 are very much
  in favor (25) or somewhat in favor (48) of the
  US giving economic assistance to help other
  countries (when that question was asked in 2000,
  that number was only 55 -- there has been an 18
  increase in favorability).
• InterAction (Dec 2003) found that even after
  hearing messages about the importance for
  assistance, 51 support keeping humanitarian
  assistance at the same levels, while 21 want to
  increase it while 24 want to decrease it.
• In the Peter Hart poll for CARE (Mar 2002), 41
  believe the US spends too much money on foreign
  assistance for problems overseas and to help
  people in other countries, while 32 feel we
  spend the right amount and 16 feel we spend too
  little.
• PIPA found (in 2001) that the publics desire to
  decrease humanitarian and development assistance
  over the past five years had decreased to a
  minority position (40). These polls show strong
  support for the principle of giving humanitarian
  and development assistance but a continuation of
  the publics overestimation of the budget causes
  them to want to reduce it.
• Better World Campaign (McInturff/Drake Aug 2002)
  found that telling people the actual amount the
  US gives in international assistance makes a big
  difference in their attitudes about it. In their
  survey, of those NOT told the actual foreign
  assistance budget, 50 wanted to keep the budget
  the same, 33 wanted to decrease it, and 13
  wanted to increase it. However, of those TOLD
  that the US gives less than 1 on international
  assistance, 44 wanted to keep it the same, only
  12 wanted to cut the budget, and now 37 wanted
  to increase it. Thus, the number of those
  calling for cuts in the budget decreases when
  they learn the actual amount we give.

32
US Foreign Assistance Budget

• The Peter Hart survey for CARE (Mar 2002) found
  it was possible to create an effective message
  for increasing the foreign assistance budget
• In response, 79 say they support this proposed
  increase in foreign assistance (40 strongly
  support and 39 somewhat support)

Last week President Bush announced a proposal
for the US to increase its support for developing
countries around the world by 10 billion dollars
over the next three years. The money would be
used for such things as improving education for
students, helping businesses find new markets for
goods, developing new ways to grow more food, and
fighting AIDS. This assistance would go only to
poor countries that adopt sound economic policies
and root out corruption in their countries.
33
Fighting Terrorism

• Here is what the polls say
• March 17, 2004 Gallup poll found Terrorism is
  fourth top issue facing the country today (after
  economy, jobs, and War in Iraq) and continues to
  be at the top of the national agenda.
• InterAction (Dec 2003) found preventing
  terrorism to be the top goal of foreign
  assistance (selected by 80 of respondents).
  However, fewer believe that humanitarian and
  development assistance can succeed in achieving
  this goal (64 feel the US can succeed with this
  goal, far below other goals like assisting people
  dealing with natural disasters, 85).
• Peter Harts survey for CARE (Mar 2002) found
  that 80 of voters agree with the statement,
  Although poverty does not lead directly to
  terrorist activities, when governments fail to
  meet the most basic needs of their people, poor
  nations can become havens for terrorists.
• Greenberg/Public Opinion Strategies poll for
  Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation (WorldView
  2003) reports that 81 found the following
  message to be convincing, Recent events prove
  the need to work with other countries to combat
  terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

34
Conclusions
35
Next Steps?

• Need to learn what messages break through the
  clutter.
• Need to delineate clear links between various
  types of calls to action and the outcomes.
• Need to broaden the discussion, use complementary
  messages, and sustain communications (not
  episodic).
• Need to go beyond asking for donations and
  pushing a legislative agenda (although both are
  important) and invite Americans to take other
  actions too.
• Consider undertaking a coordinated campaign.