Clear public writing needs tools as well as rules

Clear public information requires more than legal requirements, Sirli Zupping, head of the contemporary Estonian language department at the Estonian Language Institute, writes in an essay published by ERR. A new Estonian-language standard offers writers guidance on making texts easier to understand, while a recent study recommends shared targets, advice and practical tools.

The standard, EVS-ISO 24495-1:2026, says a text is clear when readers can find the information they need, understand it and use it. It sets out four principles: the text should be relevant to its readers, information should be easy to find, wording should be understandable and the information should be easy to use. The standard provides guidance but does not impose obligations.

Zupping raises the question of whether clarity can be guaranteed by law. New Zealand’s Parliament passed a plain-language law in 2022, requiring public documents from government agencies to be clear, concise and well written for their intended audiences. Agencies also had to appoint plain-language officers and report annually on compliance. Two and a half years later, however, the new government introduced a bill to repeal the law, arguing its requirements did not directly advance plain language and that legislation was not the most suitable tool.

Sweden’s Language Act has required public authorities to use clear and understandable language since 2009. The law is supported by guidance, training and tools. A study of digital accessibility in Estonia, completed in January, similarly recommended setting a common target, providing central support and giving writers tools to assess texts from readers’ perspectives.

The study examined how accessible Estonian public information and digital services are to people with language-related needs. Its central finding was that technical digital accessibility does not, by itself, make content linguistically understandable.

People generally expect public information to be clear and easy to understand, Zupping writes. They want to know what to do after reading it. That can be difficult when texts are cluttered or poorly structured, abbreviations are unexplained and long, jargon-filled sentences have to be mentally rewritten.

The Netherlands offers another example of efforts to improve public communication. When it took office in February, the Dutch government published a plain-language summary alongside its coalition agreement. It gave each topic, including housing, work, health and education, a heading, a short explanation and a list of planned actions. One commitment said official information should be understandable to everyone.

Dutch government websites are expected to use B1-level language, intended to be manageable in everyday situations. Writers have access to tools that flag long sentences and difficult words, and public-sector employees can use plain-language standards free of charge. Zupping says Estonia could move in a similar direction.

Clear language does not have to be the aim of every kind of writing, she notes. Philosophers and literary writers may deliberately use ambiguity or conceal meaning between the lines. But texts through which the state and public agencies communicate with people, she argues, have no reason to be deliberately unclear.