Communicating Findings

Even the most rigorous economic analysis has limited value if its findings are not communicated clearly and appropriately to the intended audience. Whether the goal is to inform scientific understanding, guide policy, or support on-farm decision-making, effective communication determines whether results are understood, trusted, and ultimately used.

In animal health economics, communication plays a particularly important role because analyses often involve uncertainty, assumptions, trade-offs, and outcomes that unfold over time. Best practice communication ensures that findings are presented transparently, limitations are acknowledged, and conclusions are interpreted in context rather than overstated.

Core principles of effective communication

Across both research and practice settings, several core principles apply:

Be clear about the decision context and purpose of the analysis
Present results in a way that matches the audience’s level of technical expertise
Make assumptions explicit
Avoid unnecessary complexity and jargon
Distinguish clearly between results, interpretation, and recommendations
Acknowledge uncertainty and limitations

These principles help build credibility and reduce the risk of misinterpretation or misuse of results.

Communicating animal health economics in research settings

Defining the audience and purpose

Researchers should be clear about who the findings are intended for and how they are expected to be used. Communication strategies differ depending on whether the target audience is other researchers, policymakers, industry stakeholders, or practitioners.

Key questions include:

Is the purpose to advance methodology, estimate impacts, or inform prioritisation?
Are findings intended to support policy decisions or guide future research?
What decisions could plausibly be influenced by the results?

Being explicit about purpose helps frame the analysis and avoid over-generalisation.

Reporting methods and assumptions transparently

Economic analyses rely heavily on assumptions about disease dynamics, prices, effectiveness of interventions, and behavioural responses. These assumptions should be clearly documented and justified.

Best practice includes:

Describing the analysis framework used and why it was selected
Clearly stating data sources and any data gaps
Explaining key assumptions and parameter choices
Reporting discount rates, time horizons, and perspectives adopted

Transparency allows others to assess the robustness of findings and adapt analyses to new contexts.

Presenting results responsibly

Results should be presented in a way that emphasises interpretation rather than just numerical outputs. Summary measures such as net present value or benefit–cost ratios should be accompanied by explanation of what they do and do not imply.

Good practice includes:

Presenting results alongside uncertainty ranges or sensitivity analyses
Avoiding single “headline numbers” without context
Explaining drivers of results rather than just reporting outcomes
Avoiding language that implies certainty where none exists

Where possible, results should be framed in terms of relative comparisons rather than absolute predictions.

Discussing limitations and implications

All economic analyses have limitations. Explicit discussion of these limitations strengthens credibility rather than weakening it.

Researchers should:

Identify key sources of uncertainty
Discuss how results might change under different assumptions
Avoid extrapolating beyond the scope of the data
Clearly separate evidence from opinion or recommendation

Implications for policy or practice should be framed as conditional and context-dependent rather than prescriptive.

Communicating findings in animal health practice

Tailoring communication to decision-making needs

When communicating with farmers or animal owners, the primary goal is to support informed decision-making rather than to demonstrate technical sophistication. Economic results should be framed in relation to the specific problem being addressed and the choices available.

Effective communication focuses on:

Comparing options rather than presenting isolated results
Highlighting trade-offs between cost, benefit, risk, and practicality
Linking results back to outcomes that matter to the client

Presenting results clearly and simply

Clarity is more important than completeness. Results should be presented using formats that are easy to interpret and relate directly to decisions.

Good practice includes:

Simple tables comparing costs, benefits, and net outcomes
Clear summaries of expected gains or avoided losses
Use of ranges rather than point estimates where uncertainty is high
Explicit timeframes for when benefits are expected to occur

Avoid overwhelming clients with excessive detail that does not affect the decision.

Being transparent about uncertainty

Uncertainty is inherent in animal health economics and should be acknowledged openly. Doing so helps manage expectations and builds trust.

This includes:

Explaining which assumptions have the greatest influence on results
Clarifying what is known versus what is uncertain
Avoiding guarantees or promises of specific outcomes
Discussing how monitoring will be used to reassess decisions

Transparency about uncertainty supports more resilient decision-making.

Supporting shared ownership of decisions

Economic analysis should empower clients rather than dictate choices. Farmers may reasonably prioritise factors other than maximising economic returns, and these preferences should be respected.

Best practice involves:

Presenting economic evidence as one input into the decision
Acknowledging non-economic objectives such as welfare or workload
Clearly documenting the rationale for the final decision
Ensuring the client understands both benefits and risks

Shared ownership increases commitment to implementation and follow-up.

Documenting and closing the loop

Whether communicating in research or practice settings, documentation is critical. Recording findings, assumptions, decisions, and outcomes creates a traceable record that supports learning over time.

Effective documentation:

Enables future review and refinement
Supports accountability and consistency
Reduces reliance on memory or informal reasoning
Strengthens the evidence base for future analyses

Communication should therefore be viewed not as a final step, but as an integral part of an ongoing decision-making cycle.

Summary

Clear, transparent communication is essential for translating animal health economic analyses into meaningful action. By tailoring messages to the audience, making assumptions explicit, acknowledging uncertainty, and supporting shared decision-making, both researchers and animal health professionals can ensure that economic evidence is used appropriately and effectively.

Together with monitoring and review, effective communication helps transform economic analysis from a one-off exercise into a continuous tool for improving animal health, welfare, and system performance.

Step 6. Monitor the Response

Table of Contents