Effective radiation risk communication is critical for fostering informed public action and building trust in the face of risk. However, it often encounters challenges such as inconsistent engagement, media-driven narratives and cultural barriers. This study synthesises insights across nuclear-related facilities, environmental issues such as radon, public concern regarding medical exposure, and emergency preparedness, identifying persistent barriers including distrust, limited health literacy, psychological biases, and inequitable access to trusted information. By integrating evidence-based strategies from related fields, this study aims to shift radiation risk communication from one-way, technical messaging to more participatory, culturally grounded, and socially inclusive approaches. Our main result reveals that two-way dialogue and culturally tailored messaging consistently reduce scepticism and inaction compared to conventional fact-based communication, which often fails to engage diverse communities or counter bias. Case studies, such as post-Fukushima anxieties and radon mitigation efforts, demonstrate that tailored participatory communication strategies significantly enhance community engagement and foster resilience by addressing fear and distrust. These findings have implications for trust-dependent fields such as public health, where effective communication is central to preparedness and behavioural responses. From a broader perspective, the framework of this study provides a roadmap for integrating psychological, cultural, and social dimensions into risk communication, thereby bridging the gap between scientific expertise and societal needs.