 |
 |  |
|
| |
Along with the preparatory training, equipment installation, management and monitoring procedures, and facilitation of communication between ACD and the five RACOs, the selection of project sites proceeded apace.
Administratively, the Philippines is divided into regions, provinces, municipalities, barangays, porous, and sitios. Our basic unit for development was at the barangay or community level with each RACO going through a rigorous process of selecting one barangay in their region for project concentration according to pre-set criteria.
Prominent among the criteria used were the following:
Selection of pilot-sites was made according to specific criteria
With the site selection completed near the end of the first year of project implementation, the "front end" analysis of the model began in earnest.
First, in each barangay "rapid rural appraisals" (RRAs), following guidelines suggested by Lightfoot et al (1989), were conducted by an interdisciplinary team of about eight people (i.e., RACO staff, agricultural extensionists, subject matter specialists and knowledgeable community members), to provide descriptive information through transects of agro-ecological zones, maps of land use, land tenure, principal agricultural enterprises and other income generating activities, location of houses, cooperatives and other centres of agricultural produce transformation, market availability, social groupings (such as linguistic, religious, racial) and gender differentiation.
At the end of this process blue prints in the form of enterprise, social, topography and hydrology maps and a barangay transect were placed in each project site office for easy reference.
Community participation was vital in RRA mapping
Secondly, "key informant panels" (KIPs) of between 10 to 15 members were organised based on identification of suitable participants during the RRAs.
The purpose of this exercise was to elaborate and discuss priority problems faced by each community, to trace the causes of the problems, and then to illustrate the process through a "problem tree" displayed on a billboard near the barangay office.
Thus the project developed, the problem tree analysis helped set an agenda for action by the community and participating government agencies and NGOs. In the case of the FAO project, the primary agricultural problems were rank ordered in terms of priority followed by the identification and available inventory of technologies which might be transferred to solve the problems.
An important consideration in this priority ranking was that the technologies selected should represent the needs and aspirations of a critical mass of the agricultural operators in the community. A situational analysis also determined the potential communication resources which might be used.
Key informant panels conduct a problem tree analysis
The foregoing needs assessment activities were intended as a pre-requisite to the undertaking of detailed AKAP (awareness -knowledge-attitudes-practices) baseline surveys in each community.
In essence, the qualitative data gleaned from the RRAs and KIPs set the stage for more focused attention on awareness and knowledge levels of, attitudes / motivations toward, practices of, and productivity and income derived from, the priority technologies selected for transfer by each.
The combined use of the RRAs and KIPs led to the identification of farmers' priorities and therefore avoided the need for a more general needs assessment. Like most surveys of this kind, the AKAP's primary purposes were to
1) identify knowledge and awareness gaps and address them during media production, and
2) provide a pre-project reference point for later comparison or impact studies to quantitatively assess how well the project had achieved its objectives.
Key technologies for transfer included improved varieties and recommended cultivation techniques for rice, mangos, bananas and coconuts as well as Tilapia.
In each case, the base-line survey included a preliminary section on demographic characteristics of each barangay sample, existing productivity and income levels derived from the technologies to be promoted, detailed AKAP indices pertinent to each technology, and information on communication channel access, utilization, and perceptions of the most useful of all available sources of information, including agricultural extension and NGO field workers.
An additional innovation in the knowledge section was that each interviewer was trained to judge, while conducting an interview with a farmer at home or in the field whether his or her response to a particular question could be rated as high, medium or low in terms of accuracy.
This procedure greatly reduced the tabulation time for rendering tables and graphs describing where content emphasis should be placed, such as on low to medium knowledge scores on the technology topics to be transferred.
Baseline AKAP interviews with farmers provided benchmark quantitative data for setting communication objectives, campaign message design assessment
All questionnaires were pre-tested for ambiguity and redundancy and streamlined for between 30 to 45 minutes administration time in the field.
Overall, the field interviews were given by the study leader assigned to each project site, RACO staff, and agriculture extension workers assigned to the area.
Since the number of farmers in each project site was relatively small (approximately 200 to 250 ), for the most part complete sampling was recommended to allow for a substantial summative evaluation resampling ratio of about 60 percent.
This in turn would allow sufficient cell sizes for cross tabulation of a number of dependent indices (such as awareness, knowledge, practices, income levels) and independent variables (sex, age, education level, size of land holdings, income levels, and participation in media presentations and on-site demonstrations by extension agents, etc.) and testing for statistically significant differences between base-line and post-campaign surveys.
Wherever possible, the majority of RACOs also included a sample from a non-project site to allow for a "control community" with which to compare the effects of the DSC media strategies on the pilot sites.
Since this was a first at carrying out a complete DSC process, only parts of which the ACD and RACOs had experienced previously (for the most part producing materials with limited prior audience analysis and input, and no evaluation of media effects), the communication objectives were primarily concentrated on maximum increases in awareness, knowledge and adoption or modification of the recommended technologies.
No specific ceilings were established but it was generally assumed that awareness levels should top out at least 80 percent or better and that key knowledge indicators and practice changes should demonstrate a statistically significant change between bench mark and post-campaign surveys.
No instruments were developed to generate quantifiable data on attitudes toward the technologies promoted since it is very difficult to construct reliable attitudinal scales which will yield consistent results over fame. Rather, these were drawn out and assessed through focus group discussion methods.
A common dilemma to designers of both DSC and distance education is to choose a "lead" medium and then to provide a "wrap-around" variety of reinforcement or support media: the media-mix.
In the case of distance education, the lead medium of choice has been print with radio or audio-cassettes and television or video typically providing the back-up or support function, along with access to tutors and learning resource centres.
Increasingly, conferencing capability is being introduced, for the most part audio or audio-graphics, with video conferencing on the horizon as channel compression makes distribution by satellites more feasible.
DSC rural audiences in developing countries, however, in the face of widespread illiteracy tend to rely more on audiovisual channels, with the latter supported minimally with simple print.
Certainly, with the emphasis on "pro-poor" in the current project, the bulk of the farming population was targeted at the primary education level and minimal literacy skills.
Community audio tower
With the foregoing criteria in mind, while keeping in view a multimedia campaign type of communication strategy, the search for a lead medium centred on the use of radio versus video.
Radio was the most serious contender since all RACOs were producing a regular half-hour weekly agricultural programme, with broadcasts reaching into the project barangays. Its main disadvantage was that it catered to a regional audience and hence could not target broadcasts exclusively to address the specific concerns of each project site.
On the other hand, since video production equipment had been provided to each region, video had the advantage of "localizing" technology concerns unique to each project site. Its major constraint was the turn-around time for editing at ACD's studios in Los Banos, which would preclude a frequent lead-medium presence in the communities.
For these and other reasons, it was decided to introduce a novel communication approach to the Philippines, one borrowed from Thailand, namely the community audio-tower system (CATS).
The Philippine CATS differed from the Thai model, however, in two important aspects.
The first was that the Thai system uses a variety of speaker-tower arrangements with more than one speaker set-up location per community, including powerline poles. The Philippine project used only one tower with four 100-watt speakers located near the project site office, which was often the barangay captain's headquarters.
Using this configuration, the range of clear amplification was between 1.5 and 2 kilometres. In sections of the communities beyond this range, audio-cassette listening groups were set up using the same materials transmitted through the CATS.
The audio-towers were installed by the barangays with guidance provided by the ACD. As well, production and transmission studios were constructed through community resources.
CATS studio featured a Karaoke system
|
Box 1 Comparisons of CATS versus low power AM or FM community radio The World Association of Community Radio Broad casters (AMARC) defines a community radio station as one that "responds to the needs of the community it serves and that contributes to its development in a progressive manner promoting social change." It promotes the democratisation of communication by facilitating community participation in communication". While this definition is intended to delineate an AM or FM community radio station, it also applies admirably to the method in which CATS is used in the Philippines. Basically the Philippine CATS consists of a simple recording / playback studio, a 500-watt amplifier and a four-speaker system mounted on a tower. Central to this configuration is a Karaoke system which can be used for both studio operations and as a mobile community resource for meetings and entertainment. While all basic equipment was supplied by the project, averaging about US$2 000, studio construction and materials and audio-tower erection, were undertaken by the communities. The CATS advantages over AM or FM radio stations are its relative technological simplicity, and lower initial costs and recurrent operating expenses (averaging between US$2 and 3 per month for CATS electricity bills). AM and FM stations, as opposed to CATS, typically require licenses from government authorities to begin operations, a daunting process in many instances which can hold up project operations. The main disadvantage of CATS is that it cannot be "turned-off', and for those not directly interested in a particular broadcast, it can be distracting. |
The second difference was that the Thai model uses for the most part a top-down, centralised approach wherein audio-tapes are produced by central departments such as agriculture, health and fisheries and distributed nationally to villages equipped with audio systems.
Contrarily, the Philippine system was operated for and by each community. Farmers essentially participated in the defining of relevant problems to be tackled and in the production of communication materials providing key guidelines in working toward their solution - with RACO and subject matter specialist guidance - in a "farmers talking to farmers approach".
With the installation of the CATS in place during the late summer or autumn of 1992, each project site had a formal one day campaign launching of their individual projects.
Typically, these were opened by the municipal mayor, with speeches by local dignitaries followed by pledges by officials of government agencies in line with the priority needs detailed on the problem tree billboards.
Displays of agricultural produce and prizes for winning entries, sports events, singing and dancing, along with sumptuous meals, all were part of the special day marking the kick-off of the multimedia campaigns spurring the promotion of the recommended technologies.
Some project-sites used flip-charts to good effect
After a trial period of some six months, Community Broadcast Associations (CBAs) were organised to oversee and control the output of community announcements and content of technology transfer messages, and its members were trained in broadcasting techniques.
A typical CBA would consist of a station manager, a production manager, a lead technician; about a dozen programme producers and four or five content specialists, approximately 20 members in all.
In addition, support media in the form of posters, simple, illustrated printed brochures, flip-charts, bulletin boards and video were being produced.
Pre-testing of materials for content comprehensibility was undertaken on the print-based and static visual media with samples of farmers from each community.
As the campaigns progressed, CATS hook-ups with the regular radio programmes developed by each RACO became a weekly routine. And by the summer of 1993, four out of five RACOs were planning for "Schools-on-the-Air" or SoAs (See Box 2).
By the end of the project the CATS had become the symbol of the project in the five sites and its potential as a sustaining catalyst for transfer to community development programmes in other sites appeared promising.
|
Box 2 Schools on-the-Air (SoA) SoAs have been have been part of the Philippine landscape since the 1960's and used in a variety of development themes. Their main role has been one of providing sequenced,instructional modules backed-up with other media providing informational and / or motivational support. Often, and certainly in the case of this project, they are reinforced at the field level through extension workers. SoAs were conducted three of the four sites evaluated; two of the pilot-areas offered two rounds of SoAs on different topics. Typically, an SoA would have two dozen or so 15 minute modules or lessons, aired twice a week over a two to three month period on a particularaspect of the technology promoted. Each module would be supported by a mimeo-graphed flier with follow- up print information. Farmers are required to formally enroll in the school and after each lesson are asked to complete a feedback form assessing their understanding of the contents. When results indicate areas of weakness, they are passed on to the programme producers for remedial attention in future broadcasts. Listeners are also encouraged to provide suggestions for additional information. Those who participate in the full programme receive certificates of completion, and are presented with a take-home publication, such as "Rice or mango primers", featuring more detailed information to reinforce the audio-tower broadcasts. The enthusiasm and commitment generated by the SoAs has been highly encouraging. In Barangay Concordia in Region 6, for example, out of 88 enrollees for a 16 lesson SoA on mango production, 81, or 92 percent, graduated; in Tulungatung, Region 9, the four-month SoA on rice production run from January to May 1994 with an initial enrollment of 101 farmers saw 98 of them complete the course, marking an impressive 97 percent, retention rate. In Barangay Naghakel in Region 2, three SoAs were conducted:
Only one pilot site, Tunlugatung, was in a position to collect data on the immediate effects of the SoA (as a major component in the campaign strategy) on production increases, but at face value the evidence is highly encouraging (see Box 4 on page 42). |
Several evaluation methods were used throughout the project to fully examine the strengths and weaknesses of the approaches used so as to maximize the transferability of the process to other sites in the Philippines and perhaps internationally as well.
From a qualitative aspect, a process documentation specialist was hired by the project, who, together with the national consultant and management staff from the ACD, undertook quarterly visits to each project site for monitoring progress in line withannual work-plans.
This included making on-site recommendations with regard to solving technical problems arising, and backstopping media planning, production and distribution term evaluation workshop, the findings of the process documentation specialist were presented along with suggestions to address prior weaknesses flagged for the remaining year of the project.
As well, case studies were presented by the five RACOs around the topics of strengthened linkages between members of NARDNN, feasibility and effectiveness of the CATSas the lead medium, analysis of the complete multi-channel strategy being implemented, and an assessment of the utility of the workshops conducted along with skills training still requiring attention.
The quantitative aspects of the evaluation mainly involved pre-post-project AKAP comparisons along with, wherever possible, increased productivity and income levels directly related to the technologies being transferred.
In all regions, project site data were compared with non-project barangays to allow for more rigorous analyses of the effects of the multi-faceted campaigns.
A summative evaluation workshop during the closing month of the project detailed the findings and recommendations of each RACO's qualitative and quantitative case studies, and steps were taken to build-in sustainability of the CATS and provision for continued communication support.
Direct audio tower messages, field recorded audio-cassettes, video and pamphlets formed the mainstay of campaign materials
|
|
| |