Improving public messaging about extreme heat, drought and wildfire risk

Much of the UK has experienced heatwave conditions already this year, and with the prospect of further extreme heat events looming this summer, how we communicate about heat risks is yet again coming under the spotlight. This matters because making public messaging more consistent and joined-up could help people understand it better, trust it more, and make them more likely to act on it to protect themselves. 

Climate change is increasing the frequency, intensity, and complexity of environmental hazards around the globe. The UK is no exception to these trends, with the occurrence of extreme heat, drought, and wildfires becoming more common. These hazards have significant impacts on both the environment and human health. As happened last summer in 2025 these conditions are also increasingly likely to co-occur at the same point in time. While extreme heat risks have become much more salient in the UK public mind in the past 15 years¹, public communication still plays a critical role in helping people and organisations prepare for, and respond to, these events.

Critically, most public guidance is designed around individual hazards rather than the now expected co-concurrence of such extreme heat weather events.

Our review of around 1,200 public-facing messages containing behavioural advice on heat-related weather events drawn from 69 sources from UK and devolved governments, local governments, public bodies, and private companies synthesises the available guidance and messaging for communicators. Our study  revealed that while public health advice is largely consistent for the individual risks of overheating, drought and wildfires, clearer prioritisation, better explanation, stronger local tailoring, and more inclusive and accessible messaging are needed when extreme heat, drought, and wildfires occur together.

The key findings from the study² were:

Advice was generally consistent within individual risks
Advice on each individual risk was largely consistent. Different organisations tended to provide similar guidance on extreme heat, drought, or wildfires. This suggests that, for single hazards, the public is generally receiving aligned advice from a range of national and local organisations.

Contradictions can emerge when risks happen together
Although few contradictions were identified overall, some important tensions appeared when risks occurred at the same time.

• Extreme heat guidance often advises people to stay indoors and open windows, but this may be unsafe during wildfires, especially when smoke is present or when evacuation is required.
• During periods of both extreme heat and drought, people may also be advised to stay hydrated and maintain hygiene while simultaneously being asked to conserve water.
• We also identified specific inconsistencies in wildfire-related advice. Some messages differed on whether open fires, including barbecues, were permitted or prohibited in certain public outdoor spaces.
• There were also tensions between messages asking people to report fires immediately and advice suggesting that people could intervene if they felt confident to do so.

These examples show how advice that appears reasonable in one context may become confusing when conditions change or risks overlap.

Local advice was aligned, but rarely tailored
Advice from local organisations was largely consistent with messages from national bodies. This alignment is important because it helps to avoid confusion. However, we also found relatively few examples of advice being tailored to local contexts. Local tailoring can support behaviour change by making guidance more relevant to people’s immediate environments, services, risks, and resources.

Too many actions, not enough prioritisation
Most resources advised the public to perform several behaviours at the same time, but often with little or no clarification about which actions were the most important, who should follow them, and in what context. During emergencies, people need to make quick decisions, hence, advice is more useful when it clearly explains what to do first, when to do it, and why. One example of clear and practical advice came from drought messaging: “Water gardens in the early morning or evening to reduce evaporation.” This type of message explains both the action and the reason behind it.

Gaps in advice for vulnerable groups and specific situations
Gaps in advice for some groups and circumstances were also evident. There was inconsistency in how messages addressed people who may be more vulnerable during extreme weather, including older people, disabled people, and people experiencing homelessness. Few examples signposted people to services, tools, or resources for additional support, while in wildfire advice child and pet safety were also rarely mentioned. These gaps matter because climate-related risks are not experienced by households equally, with some groups needing more specific advice and capabilities through practical support.

Limited use of images and visual tools
Few messages used images to support messaging. This is a missed opportunity since visual tools can help capture attention, explain complex information simply, and help people to develop actionable mental models of a risk and how to respond. Infographics, diagrams, checklists, and decision aids may be especially useful when people are under stress or need to act quickly.

Strong coordination across agencies
Climate-related risks do not occur in isolation, and neither should the messages designed to help people respond. Our review highlighted the need for greater coordination between organisations responsible for public communication, including health agencies, environmental bodies, emergency planners, local authorities, and national government departments. More integrated approaches could help ensure that public guidance remains consistent, coherent, and actionable during concurrent risks.

Behavioural clarity as a resilience strategy
A broader lesson from our review is that public resilience depends not only on infrastructure and emergency planning, but also on whether people receive clear, practical, and actionable advice. Effective communication should help people understand what action to take, why it matters, when it applies, and where to get further support.

The findings from our review show that current public messaging on extreme heat, drought, and wildfires provides a strong foundation for communicators looking to use or develop advice, particularly when each risk is considered separately. However, as concurrent climate-related hazards become more common, strategies within public health and environmental communication systems will need to evolve to become more integrated, locally relevant, accessible, and clear, with appropriate attention given also to testing the efficacy of messages³. Policymakers and practitioners can also strengthen public preparedness by prioritising the most important actions, explaining the reasoning behind advice, tailoring messages for vulnerable groups and local contexts, signposting key resources and tools, and using visual tools to make guidance easier to understand. Preparing for a changing climate will require not only stronger emergency response systems, but also empirically tested communications that help people act with confidence when risks occur simultaneously.

In short, making public messaging more consistent and joined-up helps people understand it better, trust it more, and be more likely to act on it to protect themselves and others.

1. RESIL-RISK: Understanding UK Perceptions of Climate Risk and Resilience
2. Alejandre, J.C., Çoker, E.N., Rodger, A., Saunders, K.R.K., Yang, G., Michie, S., Pidgeon, N., & Bauld, L. (2025). Public messaging for summer concurrent risks: drought, wildfires and extreme heat. Behavioural Research UK.
3. Pidgeon, N.F and Fischhoff, B. (2011) The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks. Nature Climate Change, 1, 35-41.  DOI 10.1038/NCLIMATE1080.

The work reported in this blog was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (Grant Ref: ES/Y001044/1)