5.1.2 Reflection 2: Complimentary theory?

Summary and Introduction to Reflection 2

Moderators

Hi everyone,

The next phase of the discussion begins on Monday September 15. Consider this weekend a transition period and you are welcome to continue making submissions over Saturday and Sunday.

We promised you a summary of each phase along with the introduction to the next phase. We also know that you are very busy so we will keep this brief and let you do the talking!

Summary:

During these first few days and in relation to the programme experiences outlined in ‘Communication & Natural Resource Management: Experience/Theory’, we have discussed the question:

Do you think it is possible to develop successful communication strategies for all of these experiences using one theoretical approach?

This has been a rich discussion and I will not try to reflect it in detail, merely, and with your indulgence, point out some of the themes that particularly struck me:

Several of you felt that the utilisation of common principles and practical check lists identified through hard learned lessons, offered a more enabling environment for community participation than a search for unifying theory.

It was pointed out that theory can be a dangerous thing if it is taken ‘too seriously’ and/or abstracted from practise. The use of guidelines, principles and frameworks were stressed as useful flexible tools that stopped short of a theoretical model.

Some of you felt that theoretical models could be built on the basis of these common principles, frameworks and guidelines - that good theory is a reflection on actual experience that captures lessons and sometimes truths that can be hard to see otherwise.

A number of you mentioned the centrality of language and its role in building or undermining understanding and communication.

Several of you pondered whether you all had the same understanding of ‘theoretical model’.

Overall, I felt some very strong lines of agreement -

1. flexible strategies that allow for ‘community’ participation are essential, and
2. We have learned many lessons over the past decades and it is possible to distil these into ‘fundamental essentials’ (whether common principles, guidelines, frameworks or theories).

Reflection 2:

While the discussion so far has focused mainly on the best communication approaches given the diversity of local reality and programme context, this phase looks more closely at some of the more influential theoretical approaches and how they relate to each other. We would like you to review the theory and change principles presented in very brief schematic form in the manual and interspersed with the experiences and reflect on:

Do you think these theoretical perspectives complement each other? How and in what ways?

You can quick reference some of these by reviewing The Drum Beat newsletter found at
http://www.comminit.com/drum_beat_213.html

To review all the submissions so far go to
http://www.comminit.com/majordomo/faocomm/threads.html

Looking forward to your further contributions,

Theory and practice

Mario Acunzo

Hi Everyone:

First of all a general comment about the forum. When FAO Communication for Development Group identified the need for developing a thematic programme focused on Communication and Natural Resource Management (CNRM) as a component of the Extension, Education and Communication Service, it was conceived as an open process more than an internal exercise. Within this framework emerged the idea of preparing a book to share current approaches and field experiences in CNRM, as well as encourage a mechanisms to facilitate dialogue, mutual learning and cooperation on this topic. These ideas have successfully materialized in the book prepared in collaboration with Communication Initiative and now in this forum thanks to the contributions received until now.

We are now in the second section of the discussion. The new guiding question launched by Chris about how different theories, change principles and experiences presented in the manual complement each other, give us the opportunity to go more in-depth in the reflection about our own experience in adapting the theory to the reality.

As indicated by many of us, we have to de-mystify theory and to focus mainly on principles/fundamentals and paths while implementing communication methods and tools to NRM. A list of factors influencing the relation between theory and practice in communication and NRM is presented in the introduction of the book under the section "Insight and Direction".

Another important aspect is how we learn from the practice, and how we share insights not only among communication specialists but also with our clientele. When we start a participatory communication process we have to share our communication perspectives, guiding principles, assumptions, (professional) methods and tools to enable the active participation of rural stakeholders and to make the process sustainable. We have to ensure training in communication and participatory evaluation of the results to foster a dialogue and to reach an understanding about "the communication project" and its social/development results. This is very important especially working on NRM issues characterized by multidimensional (local/global), multidisciplinary and multistakeholders perspectives.

I think that communication for development is a suitable approach to support sustainable NRM since it focuses on building local capacities and participatory communication processes. It starts by listening, by identifying farmers knowledge and information needs, and developing a path for mutual learning. It follows selecting and using appropriate media to share relevant messages. It ends analyzing with local stakeholders the results of communication efforts in relation to the NRM issue prioritized by the community, and by identifying how to strengthen local capacities. This is clear in an example provided today by Guy Bessette regarding Ratanaki case study, where the focus of the activities has been changed into a more community oriented communication approach and the reflections of the local team allowed to draw lessons and guidelines based on the applications of communication to specific NRM issues. I think that these are the type of examples and reflections we need to share from now on, if possible in a sustained way.

Not all are complementary to each other

Rawya El Dabi

Good morning dear colleagues,

I’m looking forward to read your comments to the question on: Do you think these theoretical perspectives complement each other? How and in what ways?

In an attempt to answer this question, I’ve prepared a table (see below) that helped me in visualizing all the theories and change principles mentioned in the Manual. I tried to fit in the change stages of the different theories in the same level (as I see it). I believe most of them mention, more or less, similar change stages but from different perspectives: top-down (expert centered) or bottom-up (people centered). I would therefore say that theories that share the same perspective can be complimentary to each other. Anyway, I am eager to benefit from the rich flow of your opinions with regards to this Second Discussion Question.

Table of Theories and Change Principles
Prepared By: Rawya El Dabi

Basic ingredients, essential components, vital links

Ketline Adodo

How I see it!

The theoretical perspectives presented in FAO’s manual complement each other in that all combined, they highlight the basic ingredients, essential components, vital links of any responsible communication strategy. They also highlight different combinations of approaches, tactics and steps that can lead to success, taking into account the human factor, local knowledge and know-how, socio-economic conditions, cultural landscape, policy environment and also ideological fashion at the global level (e. g. the green revolution in the experience of organic product marketing).

There is another aspect, which stands out in the series of experiences described. It concerns Experience 6: Regional Networking in Costa Rica and Nicaragua and Experience 7: Creating local Organic Markets in Turkey. These two experiences translate the potential of two different approaches that work successfully in different ways and different contexts.

• In Experience 6: it’s about a demand-driven strategy. Local people and local communities have established goals. The communication initiative aims at empowering the local communities so that they can design and implement their own strategies.

• In Experience 7: the change process is triggered through a market-driven strategy. It’s a mixture of Aristotelian principles (emphasizing the persuasion process from the communicator point of view) and Buddhist principles (focusing on the receiver understanding, response and then commitment). The organization felt the need, created the opportunity. The target communities had to be educated for the demand to arise. This shows that a strategy based on education (which could be viewed as a top-down approach) can produce long lasting results because in this case, "organic agriculture was used as a facet of a larger strategy to revalue rural life."

It is true, there must be a felt need for change for it to happen. But as Maria Protz puts it: "There are moments in these processes. It requires each partner taking the lead at different times". In the Turkey example, Bugday took the lead and managed to get all stakeholders (producers and consumers) onboard by striking their responsive chord.

Then the central issue is whether we should focus on process-oriented strategies or on result-oriented strategies. This leads to the Moderator’s question: Where do the pressures to go against our better judgement come from?

• They may come from internal forces: By nature we tend to stick to what we know or what we do best.

• They may come from external forces. For example: there are some key words, which seem to open more easily the door to donors’ sympathy and purse. Some professionals may feel compelled to use certain approaches or processes primarily to attract funds.

Does the use of multiple theoretical/methodological models and approaches merely indicate the infancy of the field?

NO

The global integration movement means interpenetration, which implies transparency, which commands integrity. Thus, moral/ethical values are forcing their way through all sectors of human activity. The triple bottom line sets standards for sustainability: dissolving boundaries, softening incompatibilities among fields of research and activity. For example, nowadays, financial markets, industrial sectors, are looking at eco-efficiency; corporate social responsibility while the conceptual framework underpinning financial reporting is being adapted for use in what are considered as soft areas of intervention such as development, communication. We all are concerned with measurable impact therefore we certainly need benchmarks, measurable criteria, universally applied standards.

Communication being at the junction of human sciences, this stresses the importance of the present forum and other similar initiatives for professional communicators to stay awake, keep abreast of what’s going on and keep in line. Besides, I don’t think there should be or can be an end to this exercise.

I am very pleased to participate in this reflection forum

Complementarity?

Silvia Balit

I agree with Rawya that the different theories outlined in the manual are not necessarily complementary, unless they share the same perspective. Some approach change with top down, expert centered transmission of knowledge and information (as pointed out by Rawya, three of them), while the others are people centered and participatory. A good example are the two models outlined in the Sri Lanka - Internet Radio case: the Aristotelian model and the Buddhist model. The Aristotelian model could be considered more suitable for advocacy with policy makers, while the Buddhist model is definitely a participatory and community oriented model. Thus, the audience and the objective of the communication exercise will determine the selection of a model to follow.

This brings me to an important point raised by Paolo: the importance of having professional communicators. Unless you are a professional communication for development specialist, it is not easy to select appropriate models or fundamentals to apply, especially in complex situations. And, as Guy has pointed out, to have the capacity to adapt to the results of experiments and modify approaches as you proceed. Thus, training of communication professionals is essential if communication is to become an integral component of successful development efforts, and appropriate models and fundamentals/principles are to be applied. Professional communication specialists are also needed if we are to solve the problem of advocating with policy makers for the need to include communication as an essential component from the beginning of NRM initiatives.

Complementarity?

Jan Servaes

Dear all (Hi Silvia),

I have been following this interesting discussion list for a while. Thanks to FAO for facilitating this.

I agree with Silvia. The major gap which continues to exist in our field seems to be the one between theory and practice, or between ‘those who think they know because they have the latest knowledge’ and ‘those who are muddling through on a daily basis’. This gap obviously affects all of us. It creates divergence, animosity and is not very productive to our cause. As we are not clear about our own objectives, decision makers and policymakers don’t seem to understand what we are about either.

Therefore, during a number of brainstorming exercises (some of these organized by the Rockefeller Foundation and through the Participatory Communication Research network of the IAMCR), the following priorities were identified: 1 to launch a new journal (hopefully from 2005 onwards) which would publish articles which will address the ‘hot issues’ at both academic and professional levels; 2 identify the competencies needed for DevCom professionals (we prefer the term Communication for Social Change); and 3- to look for partner universities which would offer MA-level programmes on DevCom or C4SC.

I am happy to inform you that we, at the University of Queensland, are going to offer such a postgraduate coursework program from February 2004 onwards.

Theoretical perspectives

Vladimir Gai

Dear all,

With reference to what my fellow colleagues have already pointed out. Communication is certainly a process - "a process of education, information, promotion, image building, social and behaviour change, even development, conservation and economic empowerment". It starts with information, including through media (international, national and community media). Its primary mission is to inform...

Professionals are crucial in this process and training, professional training (including training of trainers and at the community level) is vitally important, particularly, as Silvia says, if communication is to become an integral component of successful development efforts. May I remind you that some years ago UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on this issue and appealed to all those concerned (including policy and decision makers!) to include a communication component in each and every development project. I wish also to join Silvia and Jan stressing that the major gap is the one between theory and practice... And finally, as I mentioned in my previous contribution, let’s base our reflections and actions (!) on fundamental principles...

5.1.3 Reflection 3: A useful resource? Emerging needs and issues?

Summary and Introduction to Reflection 3

Moderators

Hi everyone,

As we move into the final reflection we wanted to let you know how we at CI and the FAO plan to take the discussion forward and hope you will keep this in mind as you offer your final thoughts. We will continue this discussion until Friday and then close it off with a final summary note. Once the discussion is closed a small group from a variety of organisations involved in communication and natural resource management will evaluate the contributions from this forum with an eye to finding ways to continue dialogue and mutual support among practitioners in the field. This will be used by the FAO, CI, the World Bank and other partners to prepare follow up proposals for ongoing support to, and dialogue between, communicators working on natural resource management. We may contact you again for further input and contribution as this follow up process unfolds.

Summary:

The discussion to date has been interesting and stimulating. While it has been difficult for us to completely leave the discussions begun with the first reflection there is a natural link between the fairly abstract examination of the role of theory in communication practise and the actual theoretical models and approaches that are widely used. My sense is that for many of you, all the models and approaches discussed in the publication continue to have application depending on the context and audience. While there may seem to be a contradiction between a ‘hierarchical’ and a ‘horizontal’ model (Aristotle vs. Buddha) both of these general approaches can be the appropriate choice depending on context. You have also said that regardless of the model chosen there continue to be ‘fundamental essentials’ that have been outlined in a number of contributions listing principles and guidelines. A communication initiative that ignores these principles and guidelines will almost certainly fail to achieve all of its goals. From this it seems fair to say that most of you feel there is a level of complimentarity between the theoretical approaches provided they are grounded in similar principles.

Reflection 3:

Our final discussion focuses on the approach and structure of the manual itself as well as your thoughts on the forum and what it tells you about the need for further collaboration and cooperation among those of us working in the field of CNRM.

The approach and structure of the manual is outlined in the introduction http://www.comminit.com/stfaocommnrm/sld-8151.html and reflected in the experiences and theory exercises. We would like you to review the introduction, consider your sense of the approach from the discussion so far and reflect on:

Will this book be useful to you in your work and where do you think it will be most effectively used: i.e. in the field, in short training programmes, in university courses etc.?

As a wrap up to the discussion we’d like you to also reflect on:

What the discussion has told you about emerging needs and issues in the field and what kinds of further collaboration and cooperation can help address these needs?

Communication is complex

Sanjay Gupta

Hi to all!

I am working as a DevComm (CFSC) consultant in India and mostly work in rural poverty and environment related areas. From what I have seen, there is no simple or universal answer to communication needs or concerns. It could vary from situation to situation, from person to person, from village to village, and from project to project. What I am trying to say is that communication needs to stem from those who drive the project or initiative. It could be the rural community, project managers or some other influence. As such, communication is not separate from other areas. Whether it is monitoring, implementation, evaluation, you are sending out a communication message.

Of course, there is a gap between those communication professionals who practise in the field and those situated in head offices and research organizations. Workshops are probably an okay way to bridge this gap. the best way is for the researchers to go to the project/small geographical area level. Theory sounds very good on paper but fails a lot when it comes to implementation. A lot of gut feeling and common sense is often more useful.

I am really learning a lot from this discussion. Thanks a lot.

Theory or practice

Dr. Maria Angela Torres S

Hallo,

I am very happy about the discussion Theme you proposed and the book you offer to evaluate.

Two months ago I finished my Drs.Degree in Communication Science in Germany, with a Research about Environmental Communication in Development Countries, a qualitative Research about Communication in an Environmental Project in Colombia, my country. There I proposed some Principles for communication in Environmental Projects or better in Sustainable Development Projects... but the most important thing I reflected is that theory as well as practice are complementary subjects for practitioners and communicators in this field of action. Practice without Theory flows away, you loose it. Theory without practice is only written paper for Libraries!

I have a doubt about what we are discussing: is it about environmental communication? or about development communication? In my research I found some differences between these types of communication, but also about their complementarity: Environmental Communication cannot flow well without practicing participation principles that are clear and have tradition in development communication. But Environmental Communication is not Development Communication and not diffusion of sustainable

Technologies or Information!

Real time collaboration

Jon Gresham

Thanks to all for the distillation of centuries (?) of cumulative experience into the series of short paragraphs on communications.

I am testing a wiki (web collaboration tool) for linking academics, entrepreneurs, development professionals, and other "thinkers" to address how to communicate with each other about development of "civil stability" in Iraq.

http://CivilSocietyIraq.seedwiki.com.

I began with collecting extensive field data on the perceived threats by Iraqis in Iraq and outside, and then performed standard, multilevel, and multivariate analysis on the data. Interesting summaries were found. Since I wanted to build participation towards civil action, I asked a number of Iraqis and other Middle Eastern sociologists to contribute to the wiki development and content. Analysis and interpretation is a bit too important to leave to a few academics. Collaboration, beyond brainstorming, means working together for common benefit.

My concept was that I would post my a framework of questions & research about civil society in Iraq, add some of the data I have collected, and then others would contribute to analysis, making a truly collaborative documentation of what has been and what could be in Iraq.

Unfortunately, the idea of adding ideas and questions, as per this great discussion thread by faocomm, has not worked on the Iraq wiki.

It seemed very sensible: do a discussion thread, but in real time on a wiki/web site so that everyone can contribute to content and how is organized. Dynamic, not static discussion was the idea that seemed to work sometimes in some places.

But, this wiki has not worked well, if quantity of thoughtful comments is the measure.

If realtime collaboration is the goal, how might a wiki/web forum actually work as a tool that might help in some situations?

Thank you for the input and the great ideas coming from this forum.

Theory, practice, new meanings for old terms

Anna P. Hidalgo

Dear everyone,

Thank you for including me in this interesting and stimulating discussion.

Part of my work is capacity building for grassroots NGOs and some local government agencies in the Philippines, and earlier this year we did a series of communications training seminars. To prepare for the training, I did a ton of research on theory, something I hadn’t done since college. It was quite a challenge trying to decide what information would actually be useful to people on the ground, most of whom are not communication specialists. Rather, communication is one of many, many things they do.

I did 3 workshops, with a total of about 100 participants. The participants worked in the area of child abuse prevention and intervention, with out-of-school youth, and indigenous youth, and they literally came from all over the country. I have to say that they were very appreciative of the discussions we had about theory. They told me it really helped them see communication in a different way, and they would reexamine their assumptions, strategies, tools, and methods in this new light. Between "top-down" and "participatory," it seemed that many of them preferred not to choose one or the other, but different combinations of both in different situations.

So, while I don’t think extremely academic or jargon-laden papers or theories that attempt to encompass every single little thing - while they are important in other contexts - are necessarily useful for people in the field, I do think theoretical frameworks can go a long way towards helping people see things in a different light.

Another thing that struck me is how little the "raging debate" has seemed to have "trickled down" to the field, at least in my country. It is also a testament to how influential the earlier family planning programs were that the term "IEC" is used universally, for everything - not just for RH or family planning programs. To say that IEC is no longer fashionable because it’s associated with the "old paradigm" doesn’t have much of an impact, because to them this is an abstract and academic point. What it’s called doesn’t matter that much, and they’re comfortable with the term, so they don’t think they should be compelled to change it. I would even venture to say that they have appropriated this term (IEC) and created a new meaning for it, that has very little to do with its negative connotations in other arenas.

Communication is complex

Dr Mary Weed

Thanks for this contribution.

There are important pillars to any solid communication which are brought up here - audience structure, what they hear (not what you say), have a concept you can put on the back side of a metro or subway ticket (meaning it should be very short); have a reason to say something and a product (not a service to communicate it.)

Also, there are major messages to any communications plan and issues management that helps stratify the problems (even though you’d never give them that name). The one caveat is the fear of selling hot air and specializing in hall way drafts. So much communications comes across as PR, poster making, and does not communicate the Andre Gide inspiration for Nourritures Terrestres and Nourriture Spirituelles. All issues related to the vertical mix of themes (environment, poverty alleviation, development, and even post-war conflict communication) are subjected to a higher goal of communicating a hope, wrapped up in a dream, and able to touch the psyche in a number of sweet and semi-sweet tones. What’s left will be the memory of what they remember, not the plan or the strategy perfectly in place.

How this discussion informs e-governance research and implementation

Amit S. Pande

Hello,

Reading the mails on this list has been an enriching experience. I have found so many ways in which your perspectives can be used within the ICTs for Development community!

I have been working within the ICT/E-Governance field in India for a few months now, and I have found that the drastic power imbalance in e-governance (Policy planners "design" systems for their constituencies) is largely due to some flawed assumptions about the nature of human development.

A lot of our e-governance is still mired in deep rooted assumptions about what information and communication technologies can do for people. The trap starts from the belief that technology always enables people, and goes all the way down to the phraseology in policy documents: Lots of "will", "prove", "poverty eradication", "solve", and so on.

I think this manual will be very useful in university courses that involve active hands on projects. I will definitely share the concept of this book with fellow researchers in ICTs and e-governance.

Reflecting on the experiences of participants, I cannot help but think that "heuristics" often work better than generic policies and frameworks. I absolutely liked the Buddhist analogy, of "Enabling the receiver to see, hear, feel, and understand the true nature of their problem so that Their solution can emerge".

More often than not, I see ICT/e-governance solutions satisfying either the Decision Maker’s egos, the technologists’ power trips, the researchers’ stipends, and other positive and negative "stakes" of almost everyone, except those that are simplified and called "end-users" by the planners/technologists. This is where such discussions among planners would really help, by making communication, participation, feedback, and engagement as the foundation for technological solutions.

Finally, regarding collaboration, Jon Gresham’s Wiki idea sounds good. I’ve been using Blogs for a while, the only problem seems to be in getting enough people to use them, and posting relevant material on a regular basis. For example, http://ming.tv is an interesting and active blog..

I can certainly pitch in with technical inputs and support in the regular functioning of such a blog/wiki.

It certainly is a great feeling to see a group of people here that can think in multiple dimensions about communication.

Theory, practice, new meanings for old terms

Selim Reza Hasan

Dear Virtual FGD members,

Greetings to everyone!

I am really enjoying this discussion forum

I think communication is the combination of knowledge, technology and media that try to achieve a desired change in a systematic manner. Effective communication gives an opportunity to build a collaborative, innovative and knowledge sharing culture that is always engaged in the activity of learning and competency building. For any type of change in the community or society we need proper communication and it should be started from within the organization and networks or alliances. Because, if the change that is required is not understood equally within the organization/ network the message will be distorted and the communication will stop flowing. If any organization/network fails to communicate information or the persons involved to promote that communication initiative fails to use or equally understood the information while that is relevant to effectively communicate with the community, the communication will be hampered. In designing an effective communication system, we need to keep concern on the following issues:

• What type of information/knowledge do we need and share

• Who are the intended target audiences and what is the socio-cultural status

• How do we disseminate that knowledge

• What type of infrastructure do we require for effective information sharing

• How can we promote an information/knowledge sharing culture

• How can information/knowledge assist individual/organization and the community for better success.

Communication blues

M. Ismail Khan

From here, this mountain...

My beautiful but humble village is near K2 - the second highest point of the planet Earth, some time back people here were very poor, lived on subsistent agro-pastoral in summer and dry fruits in winter! But they use to live content, happy and longer, now they have lots of developments; roads connecting them to the world, television bringing global dramas and tensions, lots of toys, cars, hotels, money, schools, hospitals; you name it. Fifteen - twenty years down the line they are still very poor; (i myself have just crossed the line!) more dependent on external help, income, and food supplies, every time the road is blocked they nearly starve, their health indicators are going down - average life span dipping from around 80 to 45 or 50, they are quite AWARE of the reasons, they don’t like chemical fertilizers which is eroding their meagre handmade terraced fields and orchards, they cannot resist selling their fruits and cattle to meet expanded needs of the modern lifestyle, they even sell their pure dairies and apricot oil and buy the cheaper and adulterated cooking oils, they are perfectly AWARE how injurious the new import is, but are caught in the complex web of globalization, same with woodlands, pastures, glaciers, and biodiversity - many organizations and the government has been trying to help with participatory and non-participatory approaches....In some way, this poverty is like cigarette, every body knows its bad but can’t or don’t give up...

I just wonder, while doing situation analysis for a communication strategy, do we need to keep one eye on global trends, e.g. climate change, globalization, natural resource degradation such as water, desertification etc and another eye on specific local constraint and opportunity. In many situations communication works best when it is closely linked with regulation and incentives - a good mix of persuasion, carrot and sticks. Just as Vladimir said integrating communication with policies (regulations) and programs (incentives). At the same time, role of communication as a mean to manage knowledge, advocate reforms, network people and create awareness for attitudinal and cultural change can be better served by harnessing capacities for communication, which can be done in many ways at many level. Media; particularly in the third world countries could be a necessary starting point.

In my little context, I reckon this effort by FAO a very useful addition in available training aid or resource manual. The approach and principles defined are generally universal, in its scope. For something coming from as far and high as Rome and Washington, it is reasonably down to earth, carrying many practical case studies and lessons from diverse geographic regions and various socio-economic context. Couple of studies from India and China would have been more democratic... The book has enough meat for the academic circles to examine and further reflect on concepts, we the communication workers can administer all relevant ideas fitting into our work and mandate! In future, we should have more opportunities to get around, communicate and zoom onto specific communication concepts, tools and approaches, but have got no idea as to how, where, what, why and by whom to what effect...etc regards, Ismail

A late submission

Judith Marcuse, L.L.D

Dear All,

I have been following this very interesting discussion, hoping that someone out there would mention the efficacy of arts practices as potent and effective tools in communication and movement for social change. Artists are working with/in communities all over the world on core issues of concern to people within those communities, be they youth, urban, rural, refugees, activists... The transformative power of issue-based art experience - be it in theatre, visual arts, dance, spoken/written word, music - is creating insight, energy and hope at the local level and can provide a base for the creation of policies that are both practical in their application (being rooted in the real experience of the people they affect) and humane.

I look forward to the upcoming Art and Community issue of Drumbeat - and to the growth of more effective networks that link artists, social and environmental activists, educators and policy makers.

Communication needs to be truly ecological

Mtro. Marco Antonio Sánchez Izquierdo

Hi everyone.

Chris, Warren and Mario: first of all, congratulations on this successful exercise you proposed to all of us.

This book can be a powerful tool in training programs at field and academic levels everywhere, and would be great to renew it periodically with other valuable experiences in a permanent feedback process.

Solid communication theories, methods and techniques - mostly born from experience - are now available and openness and flexibility according to situation are two of the main lessons learned I think.

I would like to share a little reflection now. I believe that an effective Environmental Communication Process has to deal not only with people or decision-makers, but also with environment itself. Let me explain. There are some tendencies to think and conceive environment simply like a stage where we humans act and live, and present problems that has to be solved (degradation, contamination, loss of biodiversity, etc). Instead of this, first of all it is necessary to learn to listen and perceive what Nature systems are trying to tell us, what her/his needs are, what we give and take and understand that we are part of it, just the same way we do among people. From this perspective, it is clear that communication has not only to be social - and participative, off course - but truly ecological. It’s about a System of systems with certain communication rules.

Reflections on communicating

Alan Geoghegan

Dear friends,

I have enjoyed reading excerpts from this list and i’m sorry it’s ending, I would have liked to post more information, the group is so diverse. By being in touch with friends from afar, we learn about the unique cultures around the world and how differently we all communicate, yet very often we come to a bridge of understanding and share similar concerns. Effective communication as well as listening leads to understanding.

I’m pasting below, some reflections on 9/11 (below), which was circulated to me just a year ago from Roshani Kothari of One World (http://www.oneworld.net). Many issues have changed, though many are also universally poignant today with some very inspiring thoughts....

Hello All,

We are all neighbours here. We are not just Americans or Chinese or Russian or Cuban or African we all are humans who share this planet, the sun, the air around us, the seas next to us and are a part of a global humanity. All of our collective actions here help determine and shape the direction that our global humanity goes in. Our collective people’s history has been fighting for too long. We have fought wars for land, beliefs, oppression, extermination, nationalities and we as a humanity have even fought wars for economic reasons.

For some reason some of our neighbours stole some planes and used them as weapons. This sophisticated attack was clearly an embodiment of hate, desperation, fear, climaxing in a situation that many of us will never forget even if we tried. The hate and rage displayed a year ago certainly created hate and rage in this country towards neighbours of our humanity.

The disease that was unleashed a year ago today may be worse than small pox. The social carnage of those attacks have effected us all in so many ways. It is of my opinion that humans should never execute other humans which is exactly what happened a year ago. It was obviously an act that no one here will ever rightly judge. Also almost no one here knows exactly who did it except for those involved in some way. We have been taught by CNN to be weary of Middle Easterners, we have been taught by our President to soothe our souls after a horrible disaster to go out and shop. We as a country need to go a new way.

Soon our country will be attacking another country called Iraq. We will never have any idea if Saddam is seeking ingredients for a nuclear bomb to attack this country unless he decides to widely open all his doors to United Nations inspectors. Hopefully this will happen. Our President and Vice President have pushed this issue over the last few weeks very intensively. They are completely aware that no one can say no to this because who wants to be that person if something actually happens. Chances are if we attack Iraq then there will be innocent civilians lost who are our neighbours who had no idea about Saddam’s plans. Those innocent civilians and there families will not be praising the United States for attacking there country. People in that region will further detest our nation and all it stands for.

Our collective reputation America is on the line more than ever. Let’s all push our President by default to a diplomatic solution. Please Saddam open your doors to the UN please! Bush seek diplomatic solutions instead of violent ones. If history has taught us anything it is that violence begets violence. If a nuclear bomb were to explode in the United Stated today or tomorrow our country would certainly be attacking Iraq instantaneously without even knowing who the attack was from. Please Mr. Hussein open your doors and let us all breathe a little easier very few people really want another war.

When those 2 towers fell last year so did a part of my heart. I was further saddened watching some of my neighbours in this country start hating Afghani and Pakistani people overnight after seeing a few video clips. These clips showed a sliver of information that caused us all to go into a frenzy. The media in this country did not spend anytime explaining why other people in this world have a serious hate for this country. The media did everything they could for the next few months to keep us all on the edge of our seats.

Where are we a year later? Fighting another war in the Middle East. Fighting another war against something impossible to fight against and that is hate and philosophies. No matter how many bombs are dropped on Afghanistan, no matter how many cluster bombs are dropped on caves in Northern Afghanistan, no matter how many Axis’s of Evil are put down, people will still hate America if we as citizens let our government and corporate entities run away with the world and all the resources.

Water, sun, air, peoples time, families, friends, animals and plant matter are what really matter. The Monday night football opener this year was a big deal to some people this year. Who really was watching football the Monday after September 11th. Some family who is dying of AIDS in South Africa because of American Patent laws do not care about Monday night football. The 5000 people that will die today and every single day because lack of water because our world at our countries (corporations) direction has made water into a commodity and not a right.

So Americans instead of hating others please lets spend time educating ourselves and each other about what our government and corporations are doing throughout our world. Lets remember that these corporate entities who do so much business in other countries these days help mold other whole countries opinions about us. Lets remember that our military strength is completely superior to almost every other country but they too are representatives of this country who help mold international opinion of us all. Lets not forget our military was almost completely superior last year as well. Lets create a new global reputation that is citizen based not corporate or military based.

We as a country need to go a new way. Our country has evolved together so many times: American Revolution, Gold Rush, Civil War, Transcontinental Railroad, Depression, Industrial Revolution, Automobile Age, Television, Internet Age. Our nations economy was in serious pain a year ago and it is not any better. Many people in this country struggle to make a living wage who were not fortunate enough to get a college education to get a management job within one of America’s many corporations. Many children are stuck in schools that are training them and not actually teaching them to think and to interact with the outside world. Our prisons are full. Our corporations have merged laying off many. Our corporations have lied, cheated and utilized our democracy to elect government officials who are sympathetic to corporate needs and welfare.

Instead our elected officials and President have decided to assist these corporate entities in doing business throughout our hemisphere without proper labour, environmental, and business laws. In passing the House Promotional Authority our President, House, and Senate said to these untrustworthy corporate entities in 2 short years you will be able to do business all over Central and South America. They did this to increase stock prices in 2 years. No one else will benefit globally except for the shareholders of these earth destroying corporations who wear a friendly American face who create hate and disdain for America and Americans by operating without regard for the environment or proper labour conditions.

America lets write a new page. Lets use recycled paper on this new page on every page. Lets not have to run to the store for another 10 pack of Bic pens made of plastic. America lets create a sustainable country. A country where our consumption is synchronized with resources available. Lets find our how to take care of our needs without ruining the air we breathe and food we eat. Lets create a world where a countries currency value is tied to sustainability. A country where we support other countries and peoples efforts fairly not freely. Lets evolutionize our cars, busses and planes. Lets move into the hydrogen age. We all have so many dreams and aspirations. Lets forget the divisions and forget the credit and forget our elected officials. Lets reach out to our neighbours overseas and create people to people trading networks. Lets sustain each others beings while sustaining the planet for our children’s children. I know we have all been trying. My life path will work towards people to people trading networks, alternative economies, sustainability, learning and teaching while enjoying time with my global neighbours. Hope this is possible in my country. I apologize for disappointing people at times.

Your friend,

In Peace,
Pete
[email protected]

Theory and Practice [2] & [3]

Ms. Efua Irene Amenyah

Dear All,

For several years, I have been working with rural communities by designing, implementing, planning and evaluating community programs/projects focused on participative approach. My principal concern, as this discussion is undergoing and will be ended soon, is our position concerning the approach of Performance Improvement because my major field is Evaluation.

It is well known that Performance Improvement, if well designed and implemented, help to reinforce institutions capacities. There is no simple or universal answer to communication needs or concerns. It could vary from situation to situation, person to person, village to village, and project to project. That means communication for social change (CFSC) is designed to correct/improve behaviours in order to obtain sustainable results. Performance Improvement help to respond to needs, motivate workers for a better achievement and finally insist for better quality. It was stated that Performance Improvement is based on a systematic method because it helps to solve needs and concerns, to define new assignments, help workers to reach new tasks and responsibilities and also to be used to standards and norms.

The main purpose of this discussion on communication and natural resource management (CNRM) is to better address needs and concerns for better result or performance and to create better working conditions for better production for sustainable development. Today, many organisations are using Performance Improvement approach, particularly Reproductive Health Institutions and I suggest to add this approach in our communication debates because it is helpful in poor natural resource areas for it brings less cost in solving concrete problems or needs. Surely, there is a gap between communication theories and communication practices in fields and the best way to design, implement and evaluate projects at various area levels will be the main achievement of agricultural institutions including FAO. Therefore, it sounds very good on paper but fails frequently when it comes to be implemented. In addition, developing solid and strong approach with field-based initiatives focused on good organisations, structures, goals, targets, strategies and methods will help to meet a set of actions/activities that will lead to better performance and better results.

Many thanks and looking forward to meet you all during another discussion.

Communication

Linda Kelsey-Jones

"The meaning of a response is in the response it gets," - is a quote from Tony Robbins, and seems a profound summation!

Reinforcing principles of communication

Meera Shenoy

Dear All,

I have been dipping into this discussion in-between various travels. It reinforces some of my ideas and stimulates new line of thinking... so thank you

I work for a large poverty project, 6 million poorest of the poor, mostly women in the southern state of India, Andhra Pradesh. Most of our initiatives are done with participation of the poor. In communication, we are passionate about community media. So, we have unlettered rural women bringing out a monthly community newsletter from areas where no scribe will ever set his foot; we are planning to train women to document their own video stories.

I think it is useful to cull out these universal principles of communication. Most of us already probably have it at the back of their mind when we formulate strategy. This process will reinforce them.

One challenge which I constantly face is the use of technology to mesh the old and new; the oral and written traditions... And how do we reach these large numbers (go beyond the pilot phase) Any thoughts on this?

Contextual vs. theory

Unknown

I have enjoyed the few emails in this great discussion.

I have less academic experience than many of you but I have 13 years of field experience. In those years of working with a few countries in West Africa I have seen how many times our NGO programs have brought harm not to mention waste of resources to a group of people. I worked in development and education. I found in my experience that many times it was more a vision and a passion of helping that would generate a changed understanding of how to make things happen. We come to a country with our theories and ideas of how things ought to be, our young inexperienced minds produce programs that just don’t fit the context.

When doing development be sure you make a clear and thorough assessment of the people’s assets even thinking beyond your ability to theirs.

Conclusions

Rawya El Dabi

Dear colleagues, below are my answers to the questions of Reflection 3:

Re: the approach and structure of the manual

This valuable manual has inspired me to use similar exercises in the training workshops that I will be conducting for NGOs and middle managers working in government bodies. I’ll be posing different questions, as participants are not communication practitioners. However, the manual, I believe, is an excellent tool (as it is with no need to change questions or anything to be used in TOT/Training of Communication Professionals and in Post Graduate Communication Programs of Universities (as already mentioned by Jan Servaes - Lucky Students!). I believe the manual is a perfect example of an interactive/participatory educational product!

Re: Emerging needs and issues in the field

I have indeed learned a lot from the discussion forum! The emerging needs and issues that I was able to draw from the discussions are as follows:

1) Theory and practice are the "two faces of a coin"! It is important to theorize for the purpose of continuously building up knowledge (as pointed out by Waad El Hadidi) and providing us and the future generations with a framework to work on, modify, change, etc. Theorizing should not be for the purpose of blocking ourselves in a box of rigid theoretical models.

2) The need to develop "good communicators" - "communicator for development specialist" as mentioned by Silvia Balit and as raised by other colleagues in the forum. Some development practitioners can be excellent in articulating their ideas and analyzing situations and theorizing, but might be poor in:

• Interpersonal communication skills that motivate people towards action and that get the "best" and not the "worst" out of people;

• not Antagonizing their co-workers or community members with the words they use or the patronizing attitude they adopt;

• being able to "build" a team and "keep" it;

• being "modest" enough to change their attitude;

• "listening" to others with the purpose of learning and not with the purpose of argumentation only;

• being positive most of the times (if not all of the times).

3) The need to work on "creating a political space and an enabling environment" as mentioned by Silvia. Hence, we need to reflect more on developing "communication principles for successful communication" with policy makers in an attempt to institutionalize development communication at the policy level.

4) The importance of paving the way for horizontal communication because sometimes people we work with lack the ethics of dialogue and thus may misuse it and sabotage the whole communication process. Thus using the vertical or horizontal communication approach depends on the situation we are dealing with. At times, vertical approaches are to be adopted in order to educate people and "create demand" - as mentioned by Ketline Adodo - for an unfelt need.

5) Communication tools are categorized as horizontal or vertical depending on "why" and "how" we are using them. If used for sending information, building image, promotion, education, and are developed by communication experts only, then they are considered vertical. On the other hand, if they are used for provoking dialogue, interaction and reflection and are developed in a participatory way, then they are considered horizontal.

6) The need to look into how to "unify" (if I may say so) definitions of terms carrying similar concepts/perspectives such as "environmental communication" (as mentioned by Dr. Maria Angela Torres), "development communication", "participatory development communication", etc. I mean, why use so many terms - that might sometimes confuse us - for the same meaning? To tell you frankly, I might be wrong at that. it remains to be seen.

Re: Further collaboration and cooperation

I strongly believe that this forum is a perfect mechanism of stimulating thought and reflection and a tool for the exchange of experience and knowledge and an up-date of the latest communication trends. Joining up with other forums such as the Isang Bagsak PDC forum and others would be of great benefit as well.

Moreover, this forum created great networking opportunities. I myself am able now to directly contact several of the participants in the forum for consultations and potential joint activities.

I feel that an international conference every two or three years on development communication would be beneficial. Such conferences might be taking place, however, I personally do not know of such events and would like to.

Last but not least, I would like to thank the partners and organizers of this valuable forum! A million thanks to your efforts and professionalism! I feel proud and privileged to have been given the opportunity of joining the discussions and benefiting from the experiences presented and being part of the Development Communication Practitioners Family!

Communication for all

Denise Martínez Breto

Hello to all,

First of all I must congratulate both participants and organizers of this e-forum for the vivid and needful discussion regarding communication approaches.

I’m Denise Martínez and I work for the Secretariat of the UN System Network on Rural Development and Food Security managing content aspects related to its website www.rdfs.net. The Network is a global partnership approach towards tackling rural development challenges at the country level through diverse approaches including communication strategies.

I widely agree with those who maintain that a single theory or approach cannot be applied. However, having in mind common principles is useful and necessary. Communication as I see it is a two-way process that constantly redefines itself when a true participation is taking place. Identifying these changes and being able to steer the results towards the empowerment of communities and local authorities to drive their own development process is essential. As Mr. Khan said a keen instinct and a good nose are to be used when doing communication. This combination of instinct and common guidelines must also be complemented by professionalism, that’s why the importance of professional communicators as Ms. Balit and Mr. Mefalopulos underlined is fundamental.

For reference and information useful for all, especially communication professionals, the UN System Network features in its website a section with useful tools, links and documents on communication for development http://www.rdfs.net/themes/communication_en.htm

The website will also feature in its next up-date (to be on-line by mid October) an article with the proceedings of this discussion and a link to the digital version of the book Communication and Natural Resource Management.

Thank you all for the thought-provoking discussion.

Communication is incomplete without accessibility

Titus Tobias Itegereize

Dear Friends,

I wish to congratulate you all for initiating this faocomm discussion forum. I am enjoying the diverse and global contributions to the topics under discussions. I however wish to put forward one observation:

Communication is very important but how about access to this information?

I live and work in a very remote setting in Karagwe district, Kagera Region NW Tanzania. Here access to the internet is very limited. Although I can get access to email and internet, this is on a very limited basis (6.00 p.m to 6.00 a.m). This is over a dialup telephone system with download speeds as low as 7200 - 4200 bps. Access to internet is virtual impossible and so can access important urls. I believe many other community development workers in different parts of the world are facing a similar constraint. What opportunities are there within FAO to assist with increased access to information in this case. e.g. investing in low cost internet access technologies to assist remote areas with internet connectivity.. to bridge the communication gaps.

This would allow us effective participation in the dialogue and access to important literature and information.

Reinforcing principles of communication

Moderators

Dear Meera,

In relation to your question:

One challenge which I constantly face is the use of technology to mesh the old and new; the oral and written traditions... And how do we reach these large numbers (go beyond the pilot phase) Any thoughts on this?

You may want to look at these 2 experiences from the book:

Internet Radio - Sri Lnka
http://www.comminit.com/stfaocommnrm/sld-8176.html

Pastoralist Communication - Kenya
http://www.comminit.com/stfaocommnrm/sld-8171.html

They both present examples of meshing the old and new. Below are two others that our Editorial Director felt might be of use as well.

Ancient Traditions Preserved

On the north-east coast of Arnhem Land at the Galiwinku Knowledge Centre, there is an initiative taking place to preserve and revive one of Australia’s indigenous cultures. This is being carried out by a number of Echo Island’s clan members in a digital form described as "an elaborate, multi-level database: words, music, dance-steps, will all live on in the software and the server computers of the Knowledge Centre."

http://www.comminit.com/st2003/sld-8369.html

Open Knowledge Network

There is a paper from the G8 Dotforce, called "UNLOCKING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY IN THE SOUTH THROUGH LOCAL CONTENT - A proposal from the G8 Dotforce" This paper examines the potential for an ‘Open Knowledge Network’ and contains a number of ideas on using technology to link and capture oral traditions.

http://www.dgroups.org/groups/OKN/docs/ACF9.doc on the DGroups site.

And from the FAO:

Discovering the "Magic Box":

Local appropriation of information and communication technologies (ICTs) - this paper uses case study summaries to highlight ways in which ICTs can be used to achieve development objectives such as rural women in Peru running an on-line bakery shop, a communication network which provides information related to HIV/AIDS to health professionals in Ethiopia, and a price information and analysis service aimed at rural Mongolian herders to provide them with the fair-market values of the wares they sell to city markets.

http://www.fao.org/sd/2001/KN0602_en.htm

Contribution to the discussion forum

Ketline Adodo

Dear colleagues,

As you all acknowledge, the FAO manual has among others the merit of giving a historical glimpse and useful update on the evolution of "environmental communication" concepts theories and approaches, along with that of "developmental communication", moving from blind technology transfer/information dumping to rapid rural appraisal, followed by participatory rural appraisal which brought the communities into the picture before the governments join in the dancing. The series of experiences described also highlight the role of the different stakeholders in the process and therefore the need for a multi-level and cross-sectoral approach in communication.

The role of institutional environment and governments in supporting communication efforts has proved to be critical in most cases. Governments tend to limit their interventions on the preventive and repressive side of policy. Incentives are often the missing parts. This is particularly obvious, for example, in the case of the use of natural resources for agriculture, which is the engine of the economies and the main source of wealth for governments in developing countries. Incentives are needed to encourage resource poor farmers to invest in the improvement of the soil capital, which is of capital interest to the entire community. A strategic role of communication is to convince and incite the public sector, the private sector, farmers and all stakeholders to join hands in sharing not only the resources but also the costs of effective natural resource management. This requires specific skills and special commitments from communication practitioners. They must also realize that they are not alone out there communicating: linkages, networking are vital.

What is unique about communication for natural resource management is that it goes many steps further and deeper than development communication. It’s about managing to use of environment resources with consciousness of the needs of others and with the obligation to be mindful of the needs of future generations. It is about responsibility, about common responsibility and accountability. I participated recently as co-director in a study on Success Stories of Women in Natural Resource Management in Africa. We realize that there was a missing dimension in the approach. Many West African women for example were using effective and environmentally sound farming practices. They could actually see and reap the immediate benefits with their families and were eager to promote their achievements. We had there some potential good environmental communicators. Except that they were mostly unaware of the environmental aspect per se, namely of the importance and possible impact of good or bad individual farming practices on the ecosystem at the local and global level as well as of the issue of intergenerational equity. There is the gap.

Regarding the gap between theory and practise it seems rather a statement of the obvious. By definition, theory is what it is and practise is to stay down to earth. What is urgent/indispensable is a framework that allows structuring experience and "theorizing practise". This is required to strengthen the foundations and raise communication for natural resource management at the level of a real discipline. This should also establish some fundamentals to support progress and evaluate success in the field. Look at the tremendous developments in the field of corporate communication! I view the present discussion forum as an initial and laudable step in this direction.

The manual has already highlighted significant contextual changes that need to be reflected upon. I would mention also the need for monitoring rising waves, outstanding ideas, emerging trends in communication theory and practise as well as in closely related fields. This stresses the importance of formal platforms to bring together professionals researchers and theoreticians to take stock and discuss these issues on a regular basis. Such platforms would serve as an observatory, a knowledge/ experience laboratory and a resource base for communication professionals.

The FAO manual would be most effectively used in short training programmes and university courses and indirectly in the field.

I would like to encourage the initiators and moderators and express my gratitude to all the participants.

Communication is Incomplete Without Accessibility

Moderators

Dear Titus and Friends,

As announced in a previous e-mail an HTML version of the publication is now available in FAO web site at the following address:

http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4737E/Y4737E00.HTM

We hope this will solve the problem of downloading from remote areas.

Contextual vs. theory

Ajit Maru

Dear Colleagues:

Like the author, I have enjoyed the discussions.

I am trying to put into context the opinions and observations of these deliberations in the context of agricultural extension and use of ICT in communication for this purpose.

I tend to agree with the author of the following message:

"I have enjoyed the few emails in this great discussion. I have less academic experience than many of you but I have 13 years of field experience. In those years of working with a few countries in West Africa I have seen how many times our NGO programs have brought harm not to mention waste of resources to a group of people. I worked in development and education. I found in my experience that many times it was more a vision and a passion of helping that would generate a changed understanding of how to make things happen. We come to a country with our theories and ideas of how things ought to be, our young inexperienced minds produce programs that just don’t fit the context. When doing development be sure you make a clear and thorough assessment of the people’s assets even thinking beyond your ability to theirs."

Many of the manuals, toolkits etc, developed for educating communication professionals and using theories for practice in the field are very useful but unless they are contextualized with local needs they remain academic exercises. Most failure emerges from not satisfying local needs especially for information.

We should also have discussions on other issues and in other languages

Rosmery Machicado

Dear all:

I enjoyed reading all the contributions you have made, I think that this discussion brought many common issues which can be tackled in different ways, perhaps this is something we will like to do regarding other topics of discussion in the future, from time to time. Is there a possibility to do it in other languages as well?, for example Spanish?, I know that most Latin-American friends would like to share their ideas too.

Communication for all

Janet Feldman

Dear Denise and All,

Hello and great to see your posting! And to everyone, the Network on Rural Development and Food Security is an amazing resource, one to which I have been recently introduced myself. In fact, I have just spent the morning editing a presentation to be given by the Executive Director of our HIV/AIDS NGO (in rural W. Kenya), on the subject of food security and nutrition as vital components not only for addressing poverty and malnutrition in general, but also the deleterious effects of HIV/AIDS on individuals, families, communities, and nations (and certainly, by extension, the world at large). We have discovered that these problems and more-lack of education and healthcare, gender discrimination and other human-rights issues, unsustainable environmental practices, lack of knowledge or empowerment with regard to enhancing sustainability at the local level and/or sufficient political will to do so at the national and international levels-are of a piece, certainly in the areas in which we operate, and thus we have tried to tailor our programs accordingly.

Our nutrition program-which gathers people, mostly older women, into formal groupings to learn all aspects of food production and nutrition enhancement, and stresses the use of local foods and sustainable environmental practices-has been tailored to address the specific needs of people living with or affected/infected by HIV/AIDS, but we have also been aware of the need to include whole communities, in part because we believe that the ultimate goal of sustainable development should include everyone, and in part because we have discovered that focusing on meeting the needs of one group (in this case those who are HIV/AIDS-affected) can cause dissension and an increase of discrimination and conflict.

Various forms and types of communication have been imperative in this program and all that we do, from peer education in both oral and written forms to messages conveyed through drama and song, the use of pictorial images and more recently mobile phones, radios, and other ICT devices, these introduced through a grant on the theme of "Women, Agriculture, and ICTs" we recently received from GenARDIS (http://www.agricta.org/about/genardis.htm). The communication done and the strategies and methods employed reflect our basic philosophical and theoretical underpinnings: literacy and education enhance life-quality and can be life-saving; empowering individuals and communities to help themselves as much as possible and embrace, enhance, or return to sustainable practices is invaluable when addressing poverty, HIV/AIDS, and all impediments to human development; communication is a multidimensional phenomenon which involves interchange, listening, including all stakeholders, authorship of projects by stakeholders in consultation with others as desirable and needed, various modes and devices which can enhance reach, understanding, and advocacy if properly used.

I agree with Denise and many who have said that one single theory or type or mode of communication is not enough, because the world and its countries and communities are so rich in diversity that programs and policies must reflect these local variables. However, I do think that some of the practices we have developed in W. Kenya might be applied - with some local variation of foodstuffs, for example - in Latin America, Asia, Europe, anywhere, and therefore some of the underlying "philosophy" as well. With many thanks to all for this very useful and highly illuminating discussion, and thanks to the FAO for its excellent programs which address the issues under discussion in a holistic and integrated way. Yours in sustainable spirit,

Contextual vs. theory

Janet Feldman

Dear Ajit and All,

Hello and thank you for the observations about contextualization of theories and practices. Also to Chris for posting the URL about Kenyan pastoralists and the blend of older and newer communication modes. You have mentioned the use of ICTs in agriculture, so I thought I would follow-up on my previous posting to Denise about nutrition to say something about our current KAIPPG efforts with regard to blending the old with the new.

In rural W. Kenya, there is a severe lack of infrastructure, making for few roads and scarce and expensive electricity. We do have an office computer but are not able to access the Internet on a regular basis (I do the honours on that, as I am running the international branch in the USA...speaking of digital-divide issues), so computers- while desirable in and of themselves-are not useful at the moment, unless of course we can get solar rechargers or develop some kind of alternative energy source. For a recent grant proposal we wrote-on the theme of "Women, Agriculture, and ICTs"-we realized we had to work within the limits of this local context in terms of what types of ICTs would be useful, not only in terms of communication devices themselves (so we have focused on introducing mobile phones, cassette recorders powered by batteries, and radios, hand-cranked and solar-recharged), but also in terms of languages used, the lack of literacy (90% of the grant beneficiaries are women who have little to no literacy), and local needs, which involve poverty alleviation, nutrition enhancement, general education, and HIV/AIDS information. We also use the arts in various forms (song and theatre to convey info), pictorial communication in terms of charts and the like, and local languages are a must in terms of materials (something we are working on now, as many communication devices are not yet translated into local dialects). We do hope to add laptops and even desktops at some point, and are investigating satellite, solar, wireless, and other devices, but again with an eye towards applicability (at least in the immediate future) and also for sustainability (we can get the high-tech items, but they aren’t useful because too expensive to maintain). Oral communication, listening and sharing face-to-face, and traditional forms of cultural expression will continue to be crucial and invaluable, and in fact this will always be so!

Mention has been made of the Development Gateway resources, which are vast and extremely helpful as per examples of translating general concepts into the local context, and also others like Digital Dividends, I-connect, OneWorld’s The Learning Channel, Eldis, and organizations like WOUGNET (http://www.wougnet.org) or "Women of Uganda Network", and the international Women’s Tribune Center (http://www.iwtc.org/) which have websites crammed full of amazing materials. The Communications Initiative/Drumbeat materials are unsurpassed in this regard, as are FAO, CGIAR, and the programs and websites of related organizations. I recently put together a 76-item mailing of agricultural/nutrition/food-security resources just from the few months of research I did of online resources (and I could have listed hundreds if not thousands of items quite literally!), many of them adaptable to the W. Kenya context in which our organization operates, even if originating elsewhere.

Our organization is lucky in that we have two bases of operation, the one having access to all of the latest communication tools and the most high-tech of devices.

It has sometimes been frustrating communicating just between ourselves, let alone trying to write a grant to upgrade and expand the use of communication modes and devices in and for our programs, but we have developed knowledge and experience along the way, sharpened our creativity, and realized that there is a lot we can do locally which is already and/or might in future be replicated globally. Thanks to all for the amazing resources and wonderful examples we will surely be hoping to use in our own program, and hope to have more discussions like this in future and keep in touch with everyone (communication in practice indeed!), as sharing best practices, worst failures, and the many mixed-results in between should be helpful both for seeing and/or building on commonalities, and for an understanding of when and where context is everything.

Dusk and dawn

Alfonso Gumucio

Before dusk in this part of the world... and on to the dawn of new communication theories and practices. Some thoughts:

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

The resource book will be greatly enhanced if you manage to capture the most substantial contributions that have been made around the issue of common principles (Richardson, Ramirez, Balit, among other). Case studies are fine, however I believe there should be a whole chapter that expands the principles. Sections from the introduction (pages 5-10) could be the base for that chapter, describing the changes in the conceptual framework of communication for development and social change.

And I would like to see there some of the principles that guide my own work over 25 years of continuous learning. Issues of:

a) Language and cultural pertinence, respect for diversity,
b) community ownership,
c) local content, rather than imposed agendas,
d) appropriate technology, better to "appropriate" by communities (socially, technically, economically),
e) convergence and networking,
f) processes, rather than products,
g) strategic thinking, not patches,
h) being accountable to the community, not to donors,
i) dialogue and debate, rather than "dissemination",
j) communication is not equal to media,
k) communication is not the same thing as "communications",... among other.

PROFESSIONALISM

Another important issue has been mentioned by Paolo Mefalopulos: the need to establish the difference between professional communicators and "occasional communicators". Jan Servaes has mentioned the process in which we have been involved during recent years. We really need to establish the field of communication for development and social change as something distinct and separate from the current studies of journalism, public relations and "comunicacion empresarial (I don’t know how is it called in English). The badly re-named "social communication" faculties or schools have much to do with mass media and marketing, and little to do with communication and social change. Communication is a specialised field. You wouldn’t let an "occasional surgeon" to touch your heart...

"The New Communicator" touches upon this issue:
http://www.comminit.com/streview/sld-5504.html

THE END OF BOXED MODELS

It would be a mistake to conclude that vertical and horizontal approaches "continue to have application depending on the context and audience". Trying to leave everyone satisfied will not help to go ahead in this critical reflection. I haven’t read any substantial contributions defending vertical models.

In Third World nations, we have been influenced during the past decades by communication trends originated in private laboratories in the US that specialize in creating models with an "A, B, C" or "1, 2 3" step structure (each one with a catchy acronym). I’ve personally been always critical about those vertical approaches, which originate from a position of arrogance: "we know these things, we have very organised minds, just follow our steps... if you want our funding". We have been during too many years under the dictatorship (determined by the availability of funding) of social marketing, IEC, "P Process", "A" something... and other models with names I cannot even recall. I never understood why some organisations get a kick in creating new models, acronyms and incomprehensible charts full of arrows going in every possible direction. It reminds me of the fanaticism of evangelic sects popping like mushrooms in our countries and trying to impose the "Word".

THEORY FEEDS PRACTICE FEEDS THEORY

I don’t agree that theory is to blame at all. Demystifying theory is not the point: the capacity to elaborate ideas, to use our brains cannot be underestimated. Theory is a framework, an instrument of analysis, it provides depth to the process of thinking through the issues of development. Theory feeds practice and experience feeds theory. The problem, really, is the tendency to immediately translate theory into models and toolboxes. This is quite typical of North America and Europe, maybe due to particular educational values always aiming to concrete "results".

This debate has contributed enormously to clarify issues. Most of contributors are clear about the need to apply principles, rather than impose nicely drafted and selfpromoted boxed models. It comes out clear from this discussion that nobody wants any more "universal screwdrivers" to apply on different social, political and cultural contexts.

Last but not least, what a wonderful acknowledgment to the importance of communication for social change this has been. If you read through the contributions, we have barely discussed specifically the issue of natural resource management. Communication has been the core of the discussion, for one reason: we are shifting paradigms. The principles of communication for social change are valid for natural resource management, as they are valid for other development issues.

Sorry for contributing this late, I was away rushing between Cochabamba and Joburg and had little opportunity to check messages. It was great to read them all together.

Dusk and dawn

Ajit Maru

Dear Alfonso and colleagues:

Bravo. Well said. Especially about US and Northern approaches to communication especially for development in the "Third" World.

If we really look at what distinguishes communication approaches in each of these worlds, it is the difference between trying to understand communication from, with a want of right words, a "reductionist" or a "constructivist" perspective. In one approach, mainly of US and the North (and Third world actors conditioned by donors to parrot these approaches), we try to put everything in orderly boxes. If they do not fit, we hammer them in using intellectual acrobatics and jargon. In the other, we use small boxes to create new worlds, with the same principles yet each different from the other. In this case, we and especially Northern actors, have to learn to be comfortable with diversity and seemingly a "chaotic" situation in communication models.

This may be one of the reasons why all our toolkits etc. do not really find acceptance, use or relevance in the field.

Communication for development or social change

Ms. Efua Irene Amenyah

Dear Morry

I thank you sincerely for allowing us to be part of that interesting and useful discussion forum we had about two weeks ago.

I have just past throughout all discussions we have had and I am inviting you in the consideration for a light difference between what is called Communication for Development OR Communication for Social Change and Communication regarding Information and Media. In this case, particularly our main goal is to develop Communication for Social Change in the context of natural resource management as it could be used today by designing and implementing its principles, frameworks, methods, strategies, theories and practices for better results. Surely, there is a link between the two by your manual will be fully based on Communication for Social Change. In everything, I do really appreciate the reading, it was a successful sharing and exchange.

Many thanks for understanding the purpose.

Contextual vs. theory

Ajit Maru

Dear Janet and Colleagues:

I may draw your attention, if you are not aware, to a very wide ranging discussion on ICT and Agriculture and Rural Development around several topics at
http://www.dgroups.org/groups/iNARS.

I am sure if we could get all the learning from the variety of sources available it would benefit all of us.

The major issues in using ICT for communication by rural communities in Asia, Africa and Latin America (Developing Countries) have been around:

• Connectivity

• Content

• Capacity

• Capital

• Community Mobilization

• Culture (of the Community and the Organizations/Institutions of the Stakeholders to the Community)

Most ICT enabled projects in these countries go through issues in 4 phases (in a continuum) which may be called:

• Related to Infrastructure

• Related to operationalizing the use of ICT in an information/knowledge system - Related to Coordination and Control

• Related to making strategic use of information/knowledge for the communities development

The iNARS (http://www.isnar.cgiar.org/index.htm) framework (around which discussions of ICT use for Agricultural and Rural Development are focused) include:

• Development of Information Exchange Platforms which could range from a shady tree to sophisticated information kiosks connected to the Internet

• Enhancing and Enlarging Community Information Spaces through Capacity Building (including communication and for building partnerships),

• Use of appropriate ICTs and ensuring an appropriate envelope of policies at community, national and international levels

• Enabling learning in a community (not of neighbors, friends and relatives, but of those who have common vision, values and needs) to create new visions, articulate needs to fulfill the vision and negotiating with multiple stakeholders for action

The purpose of all communication within the framework is to share and exchange information within the multiple of actors in agricultural and rural development (similar to the case in NRM) so that they can as community can participate and negotiate action that benefits the community be it in agriculture or NRM.

The Center for Tropical Agriculture (CTA) at Wageningen is holding an Observatory on ICT and Agricultural Extension next week. The proceeding will be posted on iNARS.

Some of us on iNARS have been testing the framework on ICT enabled rural projects such as the MSSRF Information villages and found the framework very useful in its analysis.

Communication blues

M. Ismail Khan

Thought, my earlier two comments warranted one more... Alfonso is right that ‘we have barely touched the issue of natural resource management that’s perhaps because many of us have been reviewing the book as a communication resource manual rather then resource material for communication of natural resource management. In my case, as a communication person when we go to the grass root, meet people, and LISTEN to them we usually come back with two kind of feelings; one the communities have necessary natural and human resource and the will to bring about a positive change in their lives, if they are facilitated with necessary awareness, technical and financial support- enabling environment.

Second, after communication, initiating dialogue and debate we come back with an understanding that the communities (particularly poor and marginalized ones) do want to conserve their natural belongings and manage their resources however, factors beyond their control e.g. climate change and poverty, does not allow them to do so. They do listen and agree with our speeches on the ‘value of conserving the trees for sustainability and aesthetics etc’ but cannot afford to agree on not cutting the tree, unless matching alternatives energy or fuel wood is provided to them, here our Communication Strategy may require to target the people who controls the resources and who can facilitate and make decisions on provision of alternative energy, hydal, wind, solar, gas and coal, even oil. the poor communities would come all along.

Another incentive based awareness case in natural resource is the trophy hunting phenomena; Here in Karakuram, I visited a community near Skardu last week who have earned around 50 thousand dollars in last two years by facilitating trophy hunting of Markhor, "earlier we were hunting ourselves, we were getting meat worth few thousand rupees and the animals were nearly wiped out, but now we all share this money earned through hunting, and every body guards the animal’ said a member of the village conservation committee. Besides, community’s own willingness and efforts, this was made possible by the proactive input of the national and international organizations that persuaded the government to amend its wildlife management laws and regulations.

Similarly, in the morning of March 12, 2001 The News International, Islamabad carried a front-page story regarding a proposal being examined in the policy circles about the viability of melting Northern Areas glaciers to meet water shortages in the country. Later on several other newspapers carried similar reports exploring possibilities of using laser, explosives and even sprinkling charcoal on glaciers to hasten the glaciermelt. As a flag bearer of environmental communication in the region at that time, i was naturally annoyed by the wild idea. we tried to sensitize or rather incite the local media and political circles against the idea, with an established network and communication forums, we were able to rally the local media and political leadership rejecting the theory terming it extremely dangerous and ridiculous, not just for the region but for the entire Indus Valley civilization. The furious media campaign helped reverse the dangerous thinking process at the decision making level, meantime it worked in creating more awareness about worth of glacier as water tower, the campaign culminated spurring establishment of environmental journalist forums in all five districts of the region and a resolution in the regional assembly for long protection of glaciers.

Obviously these cases are context specific and circumstantial, no doubt bottom up approach is the most effective, sustainable and long term, however sometime we may need to develop and avail strength of intermediaries to achieve the communication objectives.

Closing the discussion

Moderators

Hi everyone,

We want to thank all of you for participating and making this discussion both thoughtful and thought provoking. The forum is now closed though we will be sending out a final summary note in the next day or two.

As we mentioned earlier, now that the discussion is over a small group from a variety of organisations involved in communication and natural resource management will review your contributions with an eye to finding ways to continue dialogue and strengthen mutual support among practitioners in the field. We may contact you again for further input and contribution as this follow up process unfolds.

While this is the end of the forum, the many ideas and useful comments contributed offer much for all of us to consider as we work toward more effective use of communication in NRM and development in general.

Congratulations on making this such a rich experience.