Public Involvement Evaluation - Health Sciences, University of York

Public Involvement evaluation: diversity made it an enriching experience

The PI contributors to this project say they enjoyed meeting with people from different backgrounds to their own. They feel their discussions were summarised well in the project report.

These are the main outcomes of our public involvement evaluation with all five PI contributors. Among the PI contributors were people at heightened vulnerability to climate-related risks to their health, from both urban and rural areas in England. We shared the draft report and a summary of findings with them, primarily via email. We asked them for comments on how we reported on the PI discussions. We also asked them to reflect on their experience being a member of the PI group by filling in a Google form with five questions .

Wide variety of opinions and views

We met with each PPI member twice in online meetings for up to two hours. Due to PPI contributors’ other commitments and internet access, we met with two or three PPI contributors at a time (in groups of different compositions) and had 1:1 meetings as well. They reported that they felt safe, comfortable and able to speak up in the very small group meetings. They enjoyed being part of a team of people from different backgrounds and around the UK. One of them said: “Being able to hear other people's opinions from very different backgrounds to me was very interesting and allowed for us to generate a wide variety of opinions and views.” Contributors reported that they felt valued and that the topic was worthwhile.

Comprehensive report

The PI contributors found the report interesting and comprehensive, although one of them worried that the people in power may not take note of what experts say. They said the report captured everything that was discussed in the PI meetings. One of them wrote:“Thank you for adding in the part about my lungs and breathing machine as I think that's a powerful statement. Getting it out there to the general public about how climate change does affect people's health will be a shock [...] it needs to be said and known about before it's too late.” Another one emphasised they were pleased we mentioned the inequalities between and within rural and urban communities.

Further suggestions

Participants received payment according to NIHR guidelines, although two declined this. In addition, we provided our school-aged contributor with a letter about her involvement. One of our contributors suggested offering £5 for broadband costs per online meeting in the future, as this is becoming increasingly common. This contributor also suggested offering training in the future.

Comments from the research team

Knowing which (urban and rural) populations in the UK are at heightened vulnerability to climate-related risks to their health determined which voices we needed in our PI group. Discussing public health and climate change with this group was a profound and enriching experience for us too. It brought home that climate change is already having a large impact on some people’s health and lives. And it made it clear just how difficult it is to make local climate change action clear, fair and relevant to different people.

“I can’t help but think that our public involvement approach could be very helpful to local councils too in their quest to take effective climate action,” says our PPI Lead, who used to be a communications manager at a local council.