Core Principles of Social and Behaviour Change Communication

Changing human behaviour is hard. Getting an entire community to adopt new health practices, abandon harmful traditions, or embrace social change is even harder. Simply telling people what to do – through posters, pamphlets, or public service announcements – rarely works. This is the core lesson that gave rise to Social and Behaviour Change Communication (SBCC). SBCC is a strategic, evidence-based approach that goes far beyond information sharing. It is built on a set of foundational principles that guide how interventions are designed, delivered, and sustained. Understanding these principles is essential for anyone working in public health, development communication, or social change.

What is SBCC and why do its principles matter? 🔗

SBCC is the strategic use of communication approaches to promote changes in knowledge, attitudes, norms, beliefs, and behaviours. It coordinates messages and activities across multiple channels to reach different levels of society – from individual people to entire policy systems.

What sets SBCC apart from older models like IEC (Information, Education, Communication) is its recognition that people are not passive recipients of information. Behaviour is shaped by a complex web of personal beliefs, family dynamics, community norms, and structural factors like policy and economics. The principles of SBCC are designed to account for all of this complexity. They ensure that interventions are not just well-meaning but actually effective and sustainable.

SBCC is a process, not a product 🔗

One of the most fundamental principles of SBCC is that it is process-driven. A campaign is not a single poster, a radio jingle, or a one-off event. It is a continuous, cyclical process that adapts based on real-world feedback.

This process typically follows a structured planning cycle. The Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs (CCP) outlines a widely used framework known as the P-Process, which involves five key stages: understanding the situation through research; focusing and designing the strategy; creating and pre-testing materials; implementing and monitoring the campaign; and evaluating results to inform the next cycle.

This cyclical nature is critical. If a handwashing campaign is not reaching its target audience or the message is being misunderstood, the monitoring phase will reveal this. The programme can then be adjusted – new channels can be tried, messages can be reworded, or different community leaders can be engaged. This iterative approach prevents wasted resources and ensures the intervention stays relevant.

Formative research comes first 🔗

Before any message is crafted, a good SBCC programme starts with formative research. This involves going into the community and listening through surveys, in-depth interviews, and focus group discussions. The goal is to understand what people already know, what they believe, what barriers they face, who they trust, and what media they consume.

For instance, a campaign promoting safe water storage might assume people are simply unaware of the risks of contamination. But formative research might reveal the actual barrier is the cost of proper storage containers or a deeply held cultural belief about water purity. No amount of awareness messaging will overcome a structural or cultural barrier unless the programme is designed to address it directly. This is why SBCC programmes are fundamentally grounded in theory and evidence, using existing data and proven behavioural models to inform every decision.

The socio-ecological model: behaviour in context 🔗

Perhaps the most important principle underpinning SBCC is its reliance on the Socio-Ecological Model (SEM). This model, informed by Bronfenbrenner’s seminal 1979 work, recognises that a person’s behaviour does not happen in isolation. It is influenced by multiple layers of factors, each nested within the other.

The individual level 🔗

This is the innermost layer. It includes a person’s own knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, skills, emotions, and sense of self-efficacy. For example, does a young mother know the benefits of exclusive breastfeeding? Does she believe she can do it? Does she have the skill and confidence to latch her baby correctly? SBCC interventions at this level focus on building personal knowledge and motivation.

The interpersonal level 🔗

The next layer involves the people closest to us – family members, partners, friends, and peers. A woman may know that exclusive breastfeeding is recommended, but if her mother-in-law insists on giving the baby water or her husband does not support the practice, her personal knowledge alone is not enough. SBCC at this level might involve training family members or using peer educator models to shift attitudes within a person’s immediate social circle.

The community level 🔗

This layer includes organisations, local leaders, service providers, and the broader social networks within a community. Community norms, access to health services, and the influence of religious or traditional leaders all play a role here. An SBCC programme working at this level might engage community health workers, organise public dialogues, or partner with local radio stations to shift collective attitudes. As UNICEF’s SBC Guidance explains, the SEM provides an individual, social, and systemic lens that helps programmes account for these key levels of influence.

The societal or enabling environment level 🔗

The outermost layer encompasses macro-level factors such as national policies, legislation, economic conditions, religious and cultural values, gender norms, and media environments. If there is no government policy mandating the availability of clean water in schools, or if a country’s cultural norms stigmatise the discussion of family planning, individual-level behaviour change becomes extremely difficult. SBCC at this level often involves advocacy directed at policymakers and institutional leaders.

The key takeaway from the SEM is that effective SBCC programmes must work at multiple levels simultaneously. Addressing only the individual while ignoring the community or policy environment will produce limited and short-lived results.

Multi-stakeholder involvement 🔗

Because SBCC operates across multiple ecological levels, it naturally requires the involvement of multiple stakeholders. No single organisation can effectively address individual behaviour, community norms, and national policy all at once. This is why successful SBCC planning involves stakeholders at the national, district, and community levels from the very beginning.

These stakeholders can include government ministries, non-governmental organisations, civil society groups, community and religious leaders, health service providers, media organisations, the private sector, and – crucially – members of the affected community themselves. Their participation helps ensure that interventions are culturally appropriate, locally owned, and practically feasible. When community members are actively involved in designing the messages and activities, they are more likely to trust and adopt them.

This collaborative approach also strengthens coordination. When a health worker, a community radio host, a school teacher, and a religious leader are all reinforcing the same core message, the impact is far greater than any single channel could achieve on its own.

Using multiple communication channels 🔗

Another core principle of SBCC is its use of a multi-channel communication strategy. Different people consume information in different ways, and a single channel – no matter how effective – cannot reach everyone. SBCC programmes therefore deploy a mix of communication approaches to surround the target audience with consistent, reinforcing messages.

Mass media 🔗

Television, radio, billboards, and print media can reach large audiences quickly and cost-effectively. Entertainment-education formats, such as TV dramas or radio serials that weave health messages into storylines, have been particularly effective. According to the Centre for Social and Behaviour Change Communication, SBCC uses a variety of communication channels to drive and sustain positive behaviour across individuals, communities, and societies.

Digital and social media 🔗

Targeted advertisements on platforms like Facebook and Instagram, educational content on YouTube, health information through WhatsApp groups, and engagement through platforms like TikTok are increasingly important channels – especially for reaching younger demographics.

Community-based and interpersonal communication 🔗

This includes street theatre, community forums, town hall meetings, community radio, and one-on-one counselling by trained health workers or peer educators. Interpersonal communication is often considered the most powerful channel because it allows for dialogue, questions, and trust-building. A study of Ethiopia’s MaNHEP project showed that mobile video screenings in rural villages, produced in local languages, significantly improved retention of health messages compared to communities that did not see the video. This highlights how localised, culturally relevant media can overcome barriers like illiteracy.

The key is that these channels should not operate in silos. They should be coordinated so that the message a person hears on the radio in the morning is reinforced by the poster at the health clinic and the conversation with a community health volunteer in the afternoon. This 360-degree approach increases the frequency and consistency of exposure, making behaviour change more likely.

Three key strategies of SBCC 🔗

SBCC operates through three interconnected strategies that work together to create change at different levels of the socio-ecological model.

Advocacy 🔗

Advocacy targets decision-makers and policymakers. Its goal is to create a supportive legal and policy environment for the desired behaviour change. For example, advocating for a government ban on tobacco advertising, or for increased budget allocation to maternal health services, addresses the enabling environment level of the SEM.

Social mobilisation 🔗

Social mobilisation engages communities, organisations, and institutions to rally around a shared cause. It aims to build collective support and shift social norms. Community-led total sanitation (CLTS) programmes, where entire villages collectively decide to become open-defecation free, are a strong example of social mobilisation in action.

Behaviour change communication (BCC) 🔗

This is the strategy most people associate with SBCC. It involves developing and delivering tailored messages to specific audiences through carefully selected channels. The goal is to influence individual knowledge, attitudes, and ultimately practices. However, as the broader SBCC framework makes clear, BCC alone – without advocacy and social mobilisation – is rarely sufficient for lasting change.

Audience segmentation and tailored messaging 🔗

SBCC rejects a one-size-fits-all approach. A society is made up of many different subgroups, each with unique knowledge levels, cultural contexts, barriers, and motivations. What works for urban teenagers will not work for rural elderly populations. This is why audience segmentation is a core principle.

Effective SBCC programmes carefully segment their audiences based on demographic, geographic, psychographic, and behavioural data gathered during formative research. Messages and materials are then tailored to resonate with each specific segment. For example, an HIV prevention campaign might develop separate communication strategies for young women, men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers – because the risk factors, barriers, and trusted information sources are different for each group.

Materials are always pre-tested with representatives of the target audience before being rolled out. Do they understand the message? Do they find it culturally appropriate? Does it motivate them to act? Pre-testing catches problems before they become costly mistakes in the field.

Monitoring, evaluation, and adaptation 🔗

SBCC is not a set-and-forget approach. Rigorous monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is built into the process from the start. Monitoring tracks whether the programme is being implemented as planned: Are messages reaching the intended audience? Are community health workers conducting the planned number of home visits? Is engagement happening on social media?

Evaluation goes deeper, asking whether the programme is achieving its intended outcomes. Are people’s attitudes shifting? Are they adopting the desired behaviours? And are those behaviours being sustained over time? As UNICEF’s SBC Guidance emphasises, monitoring changes in attitudes and behaviours helps measure the impact of communication initiatives and allows for course correction.

This data-driven approach ensures accountability and allows programmes to adapt to changing circumstances – whether that is a new disease outbreak, a shift in media consumption patterns, or unexpected resistance from a particular community segment.

SBCC in practice: why these principles work together 🔗

None of these principles work in isolation. They form an integrated framework. Research informs strategy. The socio-ecological model ensures all levels of influence are considered. Multiple stakeholders bring diverse expertise and local ownership. Multiple channels ensure broad reach. Audience segmentation guarantees relevance. And continuous monitoring keeps the whole system responsive and accountable.

Consider a national campaign to reduce child stunting. An effective SBCC approach would begin with formative research to understand local feeding practices and barriers. It would work at the individual level (educating mothers on complementary feeding), the interpersonal level (engaging fathers and grandmothers), the community level (training health workers and local leaders), and the policy level (advocating for fortified food programmes). It would use radio, mobile video, community dialogues, and health facility counselling – all delivering coordinated messages. And it would continuously monitor whether nutrition practices are actually improving, adjusting the strategy based on evidence.

This is the power of SBCC. It does not treat communication as a simple act of information delivery. It treats it as a strategic, multi-layered, evidence-driven process that respects the complexity of human behaviour and the environments in which people live.

What do you think? Can you identify a recent health or social campaign – perhaps related to COVID-19 vaccination or tobacco control – that clearly applied these SBCC principles? And which principle do you think is most often neglected in campaigns you have seen?

References

1. https://sbccimplementationkits.org/sbcc-in-emergencies/learn-about-sbcc-and-emergencies/what-is-social-and-behavior-change-communication/
2. https://healthcommcapacity.org/i-kits/sbcc-strategy/
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_and_behavior_change_communication
4. https://www.sbcguidance.org/understand/why-people-do-what-they-do
5. https://sbccimplementationkits.org/courses/designing-a-social-and-behavior-change-communication-strategy/
6. https://www.centreforsbcc.org/what-is-sbcc/
7. https://www.illuminaid.org/blog/whatissocialandbehaviorchange
8. https://www.sbcguidance.org/understand/social-and-behaviour-change-communication