COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT

a medium for innovationin natural resource

managementRicardo Ramírez and Wendy Quarry

1

Contents

Acknowledgement - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4

Foreword - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5

A Story from Tanzania - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4

1 Natural Resource Management: What’s in a Name? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5

2 The need to Innovate - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7

3 Innovation: Priming the Demand for Communication - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11

4 Beyond Improvisation: Embracing Communication - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12

Communication Functions - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12

Communication Planning - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 13

5 Matching Communication Functions, Approaches, and Tools - - - - 15

Function: Making Policies Known and Relevant - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15

Function: Communication for Sharing Knowledge - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15

Function: Participatory Communication - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 16

6 Communication: Driving Innovation in Organizations - - - - - - - - - - - - 19

In Review - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 23

Recommended Reading - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 24

2

Acknowledgements

Over a dozen policy-makers in natural resource management contributed their time andinterest during the audience research phase. A draft version of the paper was peer

reviewed by Guy Bessette, Mario Bravo, Gary Coldevin, Tom Jacobson, Ma Umba Mabiala,Heidi Schaeffer, and Shirley White. Comments to subsequent drafts were contributed byEvelyne Foy, Silvia Balit, Colin Fraser, Mark Stiles, Andrew Chetley, Warren Feek, Joe Narkevic,Barbara Brown, Gaurishanker Ghosh, and Thomas Tufte. Pat Norrish and Nuhu Hatibu con-tributed case study material. We acknowledge the inputs and constructive support receivedfrom Jean Pierre Ilboudo, Mario Acunzo, Riccardo del Castello, Clare O’Farrell, and Ester Zulbertiof the Education and Communication Service at FAO, and from Guy Bessette at IDRC.

About the Authors

Wendy Quarry and Ricardo Ramírez both have a long experience with explaining Communica-tion for Development and putting it into practice in different countries of the world. But also,like many of us, they have often been confronted with the difficulty of making the communi-cation process clear to people involved in development initiatives and in donor organizations,but who do not share such a background.

© International Development Research Centre and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2004.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this publication may be reproduced without reference to source. NOTE ON GENDER:In this document, the masculine implies the feminine in references to participants, facilitators, etc. PRODUCTION:Written by Ricardo Ramírez and Wendy Quarry - Graphics by Ricardo Ramírez - Edited by Jon Peirce - Graphic Designby Brunel Design ©2004 - Printed in Canada by Impart Litho Inc. on recycled paper.

One of the key challenges faced by rural development programmes is to address povertyalleviation, food security and environmental sustainability in an integrated manner.

Fighting land degradation and desertification, halting deforestation, promoting proper management of water resources and protecting biodiversity require the active participation ofrural communities in communication processes.

For many years, however, communication initiatives in support of environmental and naturalresources management have mainly focused on the dissemination and adoption of technicalpackages. These efforts have met with limited impact.

Communication for Development offers an alternative. Its participatory approaches canfacilitate dialogue and exchange of knowledge and information on natural resource manage-ment, increase the community knowledge-base (both indigenous and modern), promoteagricultural practices which are compatible with the environment, and develop awareness inpolicy makers, authorities and service providers.

This document presents, through stories and examples, the experience of many people andprojects worldwide where communication methods and approaches have been applied toaddress natural resource management problems.

It is a joint effort between IDRC and FAO to help decision-makers, planners and practitionersunderstand why and how communication for development activities can support sustainablenatural resource management and rural development efforts.

Guy Bessette, Ester Zulberti

Senior Program Officer Chief, Extension,

IDRC Education and Communication Service, FAO

Foreword

3

4

AN OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONCommunication is important to support participatory development.

Communication and participation are, in fact, two sides of the same coin.

Communication for development means the planned use of different strategies (media and others) to help people become aware of and articulate their position,

exchange knowledge and skill to take control over their lives, reach consensus and manage conflicts, and improve the effectiveness of organizations.

Communication is about bridging understanding within a human community by exchanging messages to enrich meaning and common knowledge,

often with the purpose of embracing change.

i n Tanzania, small landholders living in the tropi-cal semi-arid areas of the country suffer from

food shortages and economic losses. This is a resultof drought, soil erosion or flooding. Sometimesfarmers suffer from both drought and flood in thesame season. Up to 70% of the rainwater can belost to “run-off” that causes flooding and erosiondown-stream. Only the smallest fraction remains inthe soil long enough to be useful.

What could be done to alleviate these problems?

Initially, policy makers concentrated on getting thefarmers to change to more drought-resistant crops.At the same time, they encouraged farmers to getrid of “run-off” water away from crop and range-lands. This, in areas where agriculture and liveli-hoods are badly affected by water shortage!

About 12 years ago, the Soil-Water ManagementResearch Group 2 at the Sokoine University ofAgriculture started working in collaboration withother researchers to see what could be done tohelp the farmers sustain their livelihoods.

How did they approach the problem?

To begin with, the researchers worked in collabo-ration with local farmers. They learned how localfarmers had managed in the past to exploit thenatural concentration of runoff in local depres-sions and valleys. They also collected indigenousknowledge on farmer practice in rainwater har-vesting.

That was the platform. Researchers next workedwith local knowledge on rainwater harvesting incollaboration with local stakeholders. The aim wasto design and implement on-farm experimentation(including participatory GIS work) to develop asound scientific understanding of farm practice sothey could accurately describe the system’s benefits.They also communicated with stakeholders throughmedia, seminars, workshops and training courses toimprove local knowledge on rainwater harvesting.

The change in perception, policy and strategiestowards rainfall runoff has been nothing short ofremarkable. There is a real demand for rainwaterharvesting technology. Government policy nowfully recognizes integrated soil-water manage-ment, including rainwater harvesting, as the solu-tion to the drought problems of semi-arid areas.

How did this change come about?

Through action research in full collaboration with local stakeholders;Through sustained communication with stake-holders at all levels informed of the research and findings.

The project has led to a notable change in policy.The President of Tanzania recently outlined thegovernment’s four top priorities in Water Manage-ment, and rainwater harvesting heads the list.

1 This extract is based on work by Soil-Water Management Research Group, led by Sokoine University of Agriculture, Tanzania.

2 Started with a project supported by IDRC from 1991 - 1994 and with DFID, SUA, NORAD, EU-DG6 and SIDA support from 1992 to date.

A Story from Tanzania1

T his paper is for people engaged in the plan-ning and implementation of Natural Resour-

ce Management programs and projects. These arethe people who need to find ways to approachnatural resource management from a differentperspective. In the past, western society empha-sized the scientific side of resource management,but today the field is the meeting ground of sev-eral different disciplines. People are at the centerof the debate as human activity is seen as centralto the management of the ecosystem.

With people at the center of natural resourcemanagement, communication becomes impor-tant. We are talking about the planned commu-nication that must be factored in to facilitate pro-gram/project implementation.

If you try doing a search using “Natural ResourceManagement” through your preferred Internetsearch engine, chances are you will find a websitelike NRM-Changelinks at the top of the list - “anon-line resource guide for those seeking toimprove the use of collaborative and learning-based approaches.” The major issues listed inNatural Resource Management include:

Sustainable development and the environment

Capacity building (especially social capital)

Learning and change

Adaptive management

Collaborative planning and management

Participatory monitoring and evaluation

Knowledge and information management

Integrated models

Conflict management action research

Individual growth and change

We are no longer talking about individual sec-tors of forestry, agriculture, or fisheries… Thesefields have been merged into an approach that isfundamentally different from the past.

We are living a shift…from the recent focus on specific natural resources– to an acknowledgment that people are part ofthe ecosystem. This means that now we have tolearn to engage many parties in deciding how tomanage our relationships with each other, withour policies and with our use of natural resources.

It is clear that… Natural Resource Management (NRM) has becomea common label. Agencies have renamed theirformer departments of forestry, agriculture, waterand irrigation, fisheries and conservation intoNRM; they are all now part of the new trend.

What is less clear is…whether the thinking by the people working inthe agencies has changed. Are they ready toembrace collaborative management 3 and otheremerging approaches?

3 Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2000. Co-management of natural resources: Organizing, negotiating and learning by doing. IUCNand GTZ.

NRM: Natural Resource Management…What’s in a Name? 1

5

6

Natural Resource Managers today face unprecedented challenges:

Assumptions People could control nature. Nature is too complex to be controlled, so we aim to managechange – hence the emphasis on collaborative managementapproaches.

Specialistknowledge

Solutions were developed by specializedexperts and passed on to passive users.

We integrate local and external knowledge and expertise – interdisciplinary thinking is a must.

Power balance Managers used to have the power to impose ‘solutions’.

We need to engage many stakeholders and negotiate ways forward – hence the popularity of community participation.

Privatization and liberalization

Communicationand information tools

Only the elite had access to these tools.

Private-public partnerships and demand-based approaches are the norm – hence the importance of making the rules relevant and applying negotiation skills.

The growing spread of these tools puts pressure on NRM managers to be accountable – hence the importance of harnessing the tools.

Global and local context

The regional and local context was sufficient for intervention planning.

Global forces have direct impact at all levels (privatization,liberalization, trade agreements, global warming, etc.) – hence the need to engage partners at all levels and to recognize that they all use different ‘languages’.

TODAY AND TOMORROWIN THE PAST

Governments designed and implemented.

• to involve people in decision-making;

• to access people's views;

• to facilitate multi-stakeholder dialogue;

• to build capacity and understanding; and

• to listen to others and share ideas.

The following process skills are needed

to facilitate a more people-centered

approach.

One of the implications of this shift isthe emphasis on: participation, consul-tation, listening, and training. These aretasks where communication excels and providespractical support to NR decision-makers.

In making this shift natural resourcemanagement organizations cannot

“go at it alone”; they need new policies,new disciplines, new linkages, and new staffexpertise.

This means that NR managers’ mindsets are shift-ing from expecting to control nature, to recogniz-ing that they have no choice but to engage othersin negotiation and to make ongoing adaptation apart of NR management.

This shift means moving away from an emphasison managing physical resources to understand-ing human activity as part of the naturalresource systems.

NONE OF THIS CAN BE TAKE PLACE WITHOUT COMMUNICATION.

The Plan Chontalpa in theGulf of Mexico Wetlands

focused on installingdrainage and irrigationinfrastructure without

engaging farmers in theprocess. Not surprisingly,

the farmers neveridentified with the

project and failed tomaintain the infrastructure.

A rather familiar story.

When the Program of Integrated Rural Development in the TropicalWetlands in Mexico (PRODERITH) began, the approach was radicallymodified to start off with a process of consultation… Video proved to

be an excellent tool to bring the farmers into the planning process.During a pre-planning phase a video camera was usedto help rural communities analyze their situation,

articulate their collective perception and propose solutions.The video-based planning methodology became an integral part ofplanning in the water sector in Mexico.

7

M a k i n g a s h i f t towards a devel-

opment philosophy thatemphasizes communityengagement and colla-boration requires newpolicy frameworks, insti-tutional buy-in in theform of new skills and attitudes by professionals,and a willingness to innovate. The shift in devel-opment thinking has been taking place aroundthe world; the accomplishments that are emerg-ing point to some undeniable facts:

That change is possible

There are neither standard solutions nor blueprints

There is a constant need to innovate

The following Mexican experience illustrates the significance of the shift:

Through the years of Prode-rith, these experiences had aprofound impact. The Direc-tor General of the NationalWater Commission went onrecord to announce that thegovernment of Mexico wouldnever again build any infra-

structure without first involving the people whomthe program is intended and who are required tomaintain infrastructure (FAO, 1992).

Our [communication] costs have remainedbelow 1.5% of the global investment and thebenefits we have had during the first phase ofthe project have demonstrated to us thatenhanced project implementation and rapidtransfer of technology have contributed tothe fact that our internal rate of return hasbeen higher than initially planned. That is 7%higher than initially planned for the project.Fernando González Villarreal, DG, National Water Commission, Mexico.

4 Wheatley, M.J., 1992. Leadership and the new science: Learning about organizations for an orderly universe. Berret-Koehler: San Francisco, p. 113.

The Need to InnovateInnovation is fostered by information gathered from new connections; frominsight gained by journeys into other disciplines or places; from active, colle-gial networks and fluid, open boundaries. Innovation arises from ongoing cir-cles of exchange, where information is not just accumulated or stored, butcreated. Knowledge is generated anew from connections that weren’t therebefore. (Wheatley, 1992 ) 4

2

The Mexican example has become a popular casestudy5; what is most relevant from that experi-ence is the fact that a large governmental systemwas able to experiment with new approaches. Inessence, they innovated and created a precedent.

Development managers today struggle with howto make the shift in their own contexts; there areno blueprints but many common themes.

Managers do not always initiate change on theirown; outside pressure is often the trigger forinnovation. In the Mexican example, it was failurein programme implementation that stimulatedchange. In other cases, external threats havebeen a powerful trigger to propel change andinnovation.

In a DFID study that started in 1993, it becameclear that natural resource scientists only beganpaying attention to communication when the veryexistence of their programmes became dependenton being able to show impact in the field.

The realization that people must be involved in pro-gram decision-making is beginning to be sharedacross donor agencies. A recent World Bank pub-lished handbook for Poverty Reduction StrategicPlans (PRSP) included a chapter on Strategic Com-munication Planning. This came about throughdonor consultation around the PRSP process. Theworking group for PRSP challenged the Bank byasking how it would be possible for countries tobuild internal ownership process without commu-nicating among citizens.

A group of parliamentarians from Uganda alsonoted the lack of communication in the PRSP. Theyalerted the Bank to the fact that the PRSP processwas leaving important citizens out of the loop. Thisprompted the Bank to broaden the PRSP process tofacilitate dialogue with all groups (with a specialemphasis on parliamentarians).

Major changes, like global warming or theHIV/AIDs epidemic, are additional factors leading toincreased attention on communication.

In summary, the factors that are putting commu-nication on the development map include:

failed or mediocre field implementation experi-ences;

increased accountability and transparency;

interaction and consultation processes within and among organizations; and

environmental change and epidemics thataffect large parts of the globe.

Regardless of the factors that stimulate change,those organizations that are able to embracechange will be doing so by innovating (experi-mentation, lateral thinking, creativity). It is in thesekinds of innovative environments that effectivecommunication is most likely to occur.

5 Fraser, 1996.

Participation, the keystone of PRSPs, relieson accurate, consistent and continuouscommunication that provokes response andencourages debate. Any communicationintervention – whether it is a radio programwith a phone-in component or a debatewith members of the press – should inspirethe audience to engage in dialogue. Dia-logue invariably leads to better under-standing, the application of issues to one'sown circumstances and participation in allphases of PRSP.

Strategic Communication in PRSP, The World Bank

8

9

Source: Gumucio-Dagrón, 2001 and The Communication Initiative [www.comminit.com]

SoulCityis a South African health promotion projectthat harnesses the power of mass media forsocial change. The doctor who founded SoulCity wanted to use mass media to preventthe spread of HIV and promote a healthierlifestyle. Soul City's programs are "edutain-ment," (education plus entertainment), anenriched version of traditional TV, radio andprint. They are popular, designed and pro-duced to air in prime time (rather then inless viewed education time spots), and havebecome some of the most listened-to pro-grams in South Africa. About two millionpeople watch the show every week. Most ofthe story lines have focused on HIV/AIDS.

Nine radio stations throughout the countryreceive the TV manuscript, and rewrite aradio script departing from what was on TV.Once the radio script is done, each stationproduces its own continuation of the TVstory line in its own language.

Soul City uses print media to reinforce thebroadcast messages. The booklets are serial-ized in two languages and published in tennewspapers nationally.

Public relations and advertising have a dualrole – to popularize the television and radioshows and to advocate for particular healthissues. Soul City is increasingly focusing onmedia advocacy for healthy public policy,recognizing that communication strategiesfor meaningful social change cannot focusattention solely on individuals. The numer-ous structural and environmental barriers inthe way of individuals advocating for healthypublic policy make Soul City’s advocacy roleincreasingly important one.

Many evaluations have been integrated intothe work of the project. Some include: anational survey with baseline (pre-interven-tion) and evaluation (post-intervention) mea-sures of 2000 respondents for each survey; anational qualitative impact assessment; anevaluation of the partnership between SoulCity and the National Network on ViolenceAgainst Women (NNVAW); and a cost-effecti-veness study.

Data showed that Soul City contributed tothe changing discourse on, and prioritizationof domestic violence within National Govern-ment. The programs succeeded in puttingpressure on government to speed up the im-plementation of the Domestic Violence Act.The Partnership Evaluation found that theimplementation of the Act in 1999 was anachievement largely attributed to the advo-cacy initiative of the partnership betweenSoul City and NNVAW and the multi-mediacomponent of the Soul City initiative.

Significantly, communities began to shiftfrom silent collusion with domestic violenceto active opposition to it. There are anec-dotal reports of pot or bottle banging. Forexample, patrons at a local pub in Thembisacollectively banged bottles upon witnessinga man physically abusing his girlfriend.

Soul City impacted positively on women’sself-worth and sense of identity, in the con-text of rights-awareness and "new" options.Soul City empowered women to negotiaterelationships and (safer) sex. Women inter-viewed report that Soul City encouragedthem to act on this new awareness of theirrights in oppressive or abusive contexts, or incontexts traditionally associated with unequalgender power relations.

In the Sahel, water isscarce and its management iscritical to sustaining rural com-munities.

However, practices in whichpoor rural communities are seenas beneficiaries, and wheredecisions are taken from theoutside by government man-agers or international organ-izations representatives oftenlead to non sustainable resultsand the aggravation of poverty.On the other hand, when com-munities are actively involvedand empowered, and otherstakeholders brought to a dis-cussion table with the com-munities, we can see impressivechange. This has been demon-strated while addressing waterrelated conflicts.

An IDRC supported action-research project experimented a Participatory CommunicationApproach to address water relat-ed conflicts with local communi-ties. The research team workedwith 19 villages in the NakanbeRiver Basin in Burkina Faso. Theteam and the communities identified threemain sources of water related conflicts: thelack or insufficiency of water; deficient ma-nagement and use of existing waterinfrastructures; and the lack of communi-cation between end-users.

They also identified causes and types ofproblems associated with these conflicts.Conflicts between different users (women,little girls, gardeners, merchants, pastoral-ists, etc.) competing at the water pumpwere the most common. Ethnic issues alsoplayed a role in these conflicts. Membersfrom minority ethnic groups in a commu-nity would not have easy use of scarcewater resources. Other issues such asancestral beliefs and taboos, water collec-tion by populations from other villagesand the prevalence of diseases related towater were also identified and discussed.

Actions to address these problems fellinto three distinct categories. Some of theproposed solutions were of a technicalnature. Others aimed at understandingand influencing mentalities, behavioursand taboos. The third category pointed tothe organization or restructuration ofWater Management Committees.

A consensus-building and decision-mak-ing process was then activated and sup-ported by way of a participatory commu-nication strategy. Such a strategy beganwith the discussion around problems andproposed solutions and flows with the fol-lowing actions: identifying specific groupsin the community and other stakeholdersin relation with the problems identified;analyzing communication needs and iden-tifying objectives; developing communica-tion activities and selecting communica-tion tools; implementing, monitoring andevaluating activities and their contributionto the established goal.

In each local community, specific groups ofwomen, young girls, pastoralists, commu-nity leaders, members of water manage-ment committees and members of differentethnic groups participated in the discus-sions. Other stakeholders identified outsidethe communities, such as administrative andpolitical authorities, government managers,development partners and donors werealso associated with these discussions.

Activities involved: community meetings,informal group discussions, a roundtableinvolving all stakeholders (community mem-

bers, development partners, man-agers and decision-makers), train-ing of community agents and ofwater management committeemembers, theatre, radio transmis-sions, video projections, organiza-tion of forum discussions on themanagement of water committees,organization of exchange travelsbetween villages, council meetings(Village, Departmental and Regio-nal levels), and elective villageassemblies for the election of watermanagement committee members.

These activities supported theprocess of change at the commu-nity level and introduced consulta-tions with decision-makers at theregional and national level that arestill on-going.

As a result, communities’ capaci-ties in organizing themselves tobetter manage their water, resolv-ing conflict issues and linking withdecision-makers were reinforced.Specific outputs included the fol-lowing: community participationto the rehabilitation of hand-pumps and installations, fundscollected in communities and

demands addressed to the national waterprogram to assist in the digging of otherwells, strengthening of community organ-izations, improvement of dialogue andcollaborative action between differentethnic groups, organizations or restruc-turing of water management committees,massive involvement of women in thesecommittees, reduction of water-relateddiseases in the communities, involvementof local, regional and national decision-makers and managers in the search forsolutions.

The research emphasised the role of par-ticipatory communication in addressingdevelopment issues. It also showed theimportance of facilitating and reinforcingstakeholder participation in decision-making processes. Finally it also showedthat given a dynamic of collective involve-ment and collaborative action, peoplecan fight poverty and find solutions totheir problems.

This project was supported by the International Development Research Centre and by a team ofCEDRES, University of Ouagadougou, 0-led by Nlombi Kibi.

Water is Life Addressing Water Related Conflicts

in the Sahel

Water is Life Addressing Water Related Conflicts

in the Sahel

11

All areas of development work (natural re-source management, environment, health,

water and sanitation…) now call for participa-tion. Take the example of collaborative manage-ment (CM), a process that engages stakeholders inagreeing on how to manage a resource.

Collaborative management begins with stake-holder analysis and participatory appraisal activ-ities, followed by a series of negotiation andplanning meetings to reach a basic consensus.Agreed language (concepts, frames of refer-ence, points of departure) is essential to bridgedifferences and find perspectives. This processmay require extensive negotiation using a vari-ety of planning tools. Finally the agreementis applied through the necessary institutionalarrangements, and tested to gather systemfeedback and adjust the strategies and pro-cedures. Being in a position to play a roledepends on the actors’ power to becomeinvolved, to be heard and seen; on their readi-ness to learn; and on legal, political, institu-tional, economic and socio-cultural questionsof feasibility (Borrini-Feyerabend, 1996: 34-35).

Communication thus becomes central to thenegotiation process, but it is not a silver bullet. Theabove reference to collaborative managementshows that other indispensable ingredients mustbe brought into play: reduced power differences,a procedure of engagement that all parties per-ceive as fair, a convener who is trusted by all par-

ties, methods of negotiation, and institutionaland policy commitment to consultation andlearning. Without the latter, it is unlikely that a communication component will ever thrive.

One of the innovative aspects of the approachemphasizes that the participation and leadershipof local people is essential to co-management. Inother words, innovation must be built on existinglocal knowledge and practice, rather than im-posed from outside.

If we ask ourselves how to actually do that, wecome to realize that new methodologies and pro-cesses must be found for:

resource planning with the engagement of multiple stakeholders;

accessing local knowledge and information;

co-management and ongoing adaptation; and

policy interaction between local communities and various levels of government.

Co-management requires a move away from tell-ing people what to do or extracting informationto a more sharing and participatory approachthat emphasizes interaction between groups.

Experience shows that:

Doing this is not simple; in fact it can often lead to conflict;

None of this can be done without communication.

Innovation: Priming the Demand for CommunicationThe error to which the concept of extension can lead is clear. It is one of"extending" technical knowledge to the peasants, instead of making (by effi-cient communication) the concrete fact to which the knowledge refers(expressed by linguistic signs) the object of the mutual comprehension ofpeasants and agronomists alike. It is only with the co-participation of thepeasants that communication can work efficiently, and only by means of thiscommunication can agronomists successfully carry out their work."Paolo Freire, 1973. ¿Extensión o Comunicación?

3

For centuries, caribou have provided several groups ofInuit in the Canadian Arctic with food, clothing and shel-ter. But the caribou hunt has been of more than merelymaterial significance to the Inuit. Success as a hunter hasmeant recognition as a man. Indeed, the caribou have be-come central to the Inuit’s cultural identity.

A potentially serious threat to that identity emerged inthe 1970s, as extensive mining exploration began in theKeewatin District of the North West Territories, bringingwith it people, equipment, aircraft and noise. The Inuitbecame alarmed that the noise was driving the cariboufrom their traditional feeding areas. The miners thoughtotherwise. So, for the most part, did biologists fromsouthern Canada, who had been monitoring the state ofthe herd for two decades, without, however, reportingtheir findings to the Inuit in non-technical language theycould understand.

Public hearings took place, with the Inuit filing lawsuitsseeking to stop the mining. While the hearings did resultin some restrictions on mining activity, information givenby the biologists also led the government to impose strictquotas on the hunting of the Kaminuriak herd. Tensionsquickly rose, and an angry impasse was soon reached,with an Inuit leader declaring a state of war between hispeople and the biologists and game wardens and callingon the Inuit to defy the new hunting quotas.

A concerned government official called in DonaldSnowden, who had pioneered the use of portable video asa tool to improve communication among conflicting groups.Snowden proposed that each group be videotaped in itsown domain and that each be able to express itself fully inits own language. He also proposed that every tape produ-ced be made available to all groups, and that editing rightsbe vested solely in those appearing on tape – not in Inuitorganizations nor with senior government officials.

Two production crews were assembled – one Inuit andone non-Inuit – and provided with appropriate training.Spokespeople were selected from each of the Inuit com-munities, and four biologists were chosen to speak onbehalf of the scientific community. Following production,all videotapes were translated into the second languagefor playback. The tapes were then collected and played

back to separate discussion groups of Inuit and govern-ment officials. Each group could hear the tapes in its ownlanguage.

So rich was the material on the tapes that they weretaken back to the communities for screening and discus-sion. People met in homes, schools, and community hallsand at social gatherings to watch, learn, and comment.The experience of viewing the tapes led to major changesin attitude, with the Inuit expressing a willingness to worktogether with government to resolve the problems of theKaminuriak herd. Likewise, biologists who viewed thetapes were so impressed by the extent of the Inuit’sknowledge that they too felt the two groups could worktogether.

Inuit leaders rejected the government’s invitation to siton its existing committee. Instead, they formed their owncommittee and invited government to sit with them.Realizing that an important turning point had been reach-ed in the debate, government soon accepted. Today, morethan twenty years after that first initiative, the Beverly andQamanirjuaq (Kaminuriak) Caribou Management Board isstill operational. Its website’s (www.arctic-caribou.com)opening note is a testament to the spirit of cooperationestablished at that time.

‘‘Welcome to the Beverly and Quamanirjuaq CaribouManagement Board, a group of hunters, biologistsand wildlife managers working together to conserveCanada’s vast Beverly and Qamanirjuaq caribou herdsfor the welfare of traditional caribou-using communi-ties and others.’’

The videotape project alone did not bring aboutthese changes. Native people and unusual civilservants dedicated to finding a way around theKaminuriak crisis were at the root of the changes thatoccurred. But the communication project was of iden-tifiable assistance, for it helped in replacing emotionwith logic, speaking with listening, rhetoric with con-sidered thinking, and ignorance and lack of concernwith understanding and care. In the process, bothsides retained their sense of dignity; nobody lost andeverybody was a winner. Don Snowden, 1984.

THE KAMINURIAK CARIBOU HERD1

A classic tale of cultural, social and economic disagreement betweentraditional users of resources and government officials

The Mexican and Tanzanian examples, and theCanadian one below, are similar in that managershave realized the importance of communication.They differ in that communication was used toaddress different natural resource managementneeds. In Mexico, communication activities wereabout engaging communities in the planning andtraining process. In Tanzania the intervention

focused on communicating a change in policy andmaking new procedures relevant to many stake-holders. In the Canadian example we see yetanother type of communication intervention: onewhere power differences needed attention beforethe different stakeholders could agree to collabo-rate. These different experiences fall under theumbrella of ‘communication for development’.

12

Beyond Improvisation: Planning CommunicationThe only way we can work for a common cause, for common interest, toimprove our condition, is really through communication. Basically, it has todo with democracy, with participation, with spreading of knowledge andinsight and ability to take care of our own future. Gro Brundtland

4

13

Strategic Communication, Development Com-munication or Communication for Develop-

ment are the words that communication profes-sionals use to indicate planned communicationstrategies that are applied to development pro-grammes or projects.

Your organization may be using different titles forthe same concept:

Social mobilization

Participatory approaches

Management plans

Change management

CommunicationFunctions

When we talk about Communication, we are refer-ring to a planned communication approach that cansupport a range of programme implementationneeds through several complementary functions.

We stress the word planned to emphasize theimportance of being proactive in plotting outcarefully constructed communication inputs toenhance program/project implementation.

There is a wide range of communication functionsthat cross the development spectrum – informa-tion, public relations, social marketing, communi-ty voice and so on.

For the purpose of this paper we focus on threemajor communication functions:

1. Making policies known and relevantIncreasingly there is a trend towards interac-tive policy-making. This move away from apersuasive advertising approach demandscareful communication planning – for publicmeetings, consultations, and round tables forstakeholder engagement.

2. Communication for sharing knowledgeExplaining scientific information with theaim of creating new perspectives rather thantransferring pre-packaged solutions.

3. Participatory communicationGiving a voice to different stakeholders toengage in platforms where negotiation amongdifferent parties can take place with regard tonatural resources.7

7 These categories are adapted from the original source: Röling, N., 1994.

FAO, Madagascar, 1994

Participatory communication

Communication for sharing knowledge

Participatory communication

Participatory communication

Making policies knownand relevant

All three functions

Development challenges (from page 6)

Nature is too complex to be controlled – we aim to managechange; hence the emphasis on collaborative managementapproaches;

We integrate local and external knowledge and expertise;interdisciplinary thinking is a must;

We need to engage many stakeholders and negotiate waysforward – hence the popularity of community participation;

Global forces have direct impact at all levels (privatization,liberalization, trade agreements, global warming, etc.), hence the need to engage partners at all levels;

Private-public partnerships and demand-based approaches are the norm, hence the importance of making the rules relevant and applying negotiation skills;

The growing spread of these tools puts pressure on NRM managers to be accountable – hence the importance of harnessing the tools.

Planning should be done at the outset of any program or project design. This makes it possible for plan-ners to set aside time and budget for the communication activities. Communication strategies that arebrought in after a program has run into roadblocks are far more difficult to manage.

Communication PlanningIf, in designing any program or project, we leave out an essential communication plan and assume thatcommunication will take place naturally, we will be missing one of the most important opportunities toensure that true communication actually does take place.

There are several steps in the planning process:

Communication mapping to identify areaswhere planned communication inputs will help;

Identification of key communication issues andtheir functions;

Identification of different stakeholder (audien-ce) groups involved, and of the channels of communication they utilize and trust;

Research with stakeholder groups to gain un-derstanding of how the issue impacts on the group (and how "each" group best manages communication); and

Matching communication functions to methodologies.

Communication Functions

These communication functions have emerged from decades of applied work in development; that iswhy they fit rather nicely with the new development challenges listed in the box below:

14

FAO. 1995. Understanding farmers’ communication networks.Communication for Development Case Study, no.14, Rome.

15

W e have established that there are severalCommunication Functions. In addition,

there are communication approaches (or method-ologies) and communication tools.

Many of the more common communicationapproaches stem from the field of health com-munication. Agricultural extension has adaptedsome of these approaches to disseminate tech-nology to farmers, with mixed results.

The point is that different approaches are used tofacilitate different functions. For example, the poli-cy function is often approached through publicmeetings, consultations, and public forums. Thisfunction can also be approached through cam-paigns, social marketing, and advertising. Some-times the same approach can be adapted for dif-

ferent functions. For example, radio can be used toconvey information but can also be used as a plat-form for dialogue and discussion.

When we talk about tools we include a wide vari-ety of media: posters, pamphlets, radio, televi-sions, drama, songs, public meetings, e-mail, elec-tronic file exchanges, and Internet websites.

FUNCTION Making PoliciesKnown and Relevant

The approaches used to articulate this commu-nication function are the most generic. They caninclude information promotion and media advo-cacy, and are often programmed into campaignsthat combine public forums, consultations, andround tables.

FUNCTION Communicationfor Sharing Knowledge

The approaches used to articulate this communi-cation function can include information – educa-tion and communication (IEC), social marketing,and media campaigns.

Many of the ideas for this communication func-tion originally came from the health communica-tion field. The work is usually centered on theneed to bring about some form of behavioralchange (mothers immunizing their children, pro-

5MatchingCommunication Functions, Approaches and ToolsThere is no recipe or model for a participatory process or a participatory com-munication approach. Approaches will vary according to different geographicconditions, societies, cultures and environmental conditions. Silvia Balit 8

8 Former Chief of the Communication for Development Group, FAO, Rome.

Photo by Ricardo Ramírez, Uganda, 2003.

Multi-media Campaign Propels Record Rice Harvest in the Philippines9

moting the use of condoms and so on). The largeamount of innovative work around HIV/AIDS hascontributed greatly to new ideas and applica-tions for this area of communication approach.These methodologies have been adapted for awider use in a variety of applications. The com-munity audio tower experience in the Philippinesis one example of a communication campaignwhere the impact was measured in terms ofchange awareness about agricultural technolo-gies, knowledge and adoption. A key to the suc-cess was the involvement of farmers in all stagesof the process.

FUNCTION ParticipatoryCommunication

The approaches used to articulate this communi-cation function are varied. They can include: par-ticipatory appraisal; multi-stakeholder consulta-tions; collaborative learning; collaborative mana-gement; and rights-based communication.

Participatory communication gets at the root ofdevelopment. It is a methodology that can facili-tate people’s inclusion in decision-making, accesspeople’s voices, and expose many of the powerissues inherent in under-development. The FogoIsland example on the next page is a well-knowncase of participatory communication.

The community of Tulungatung in Southwestern Min-danao is classified as an agriculturally depressed area. Priorto a multi-media agricultural communication campaign, theaverage rice yields were 46 cavans / ha. (44kgs / cavan), com-pared with the 77 cavans / ha. in the surrounding AyalaDistrict. In preparation for the communication campaign,farmers were involved in rural appraisals about their farm-ing system. As part of this analysis, they defined the agri-cultural technologies that they felt were most urgentlyneeded. They also determined what media they wanted touse and the times and places when they could get togeth-er and learn. The communities planned how to set up acommunity-owned and operated audio tower system,which was the main media used in the campaign.

The 1993 communication campaign covered an areawith 94 hectares of rice. It included a four-month "Schoolon the Air" with three broadcasts per week using thecommunity audio towers. Print-support materials accom-panied the airing along with field demonstrations.

Knowledge level scores among the rice farmers on thetechnologies rose from an average of 55% prior to thecampaign to 92% following it. Adoption of technologiesincreased from 46% to 68%; adoption was high when thetechnologies promoted were low-cost and simple. Therewas an "informed non-adoption" of those technologiesthat turned out to be unreliable or difficult, as was the casewith sex reversal technology for tilapia fish farming.

The rice yield increases for the wet season in 1992 were43 cavans/ha., whereas after the campaign the 1994 wet season yields more than doubled to 90 cavans / ha.Translated into monetary terms, at the selling rate of 3.5pesos / kg, the wet season harvest increase amounted to Ps7,238 / ha (US$290). Project implementers pointed out thatthe yield increases were due to the adoption of low-costpractices, especially those related to integrated pest man-agement. Of equal significance to the yield increases is thefact that the community radio tower system remains com-munity, owned and operational ten years later.

16

The shift from the old to the new develop-ment approach is also evident in that the par-ticipatory communication function is gainingprominence. This is the area of greatest focusnow for development practitioners and managers.In the past there was more emphasis on thefirst two (more uni-directional) communicationapproaches. While these approaches remainimportant, the more participatory approaches tocommunication we have been discussing here aregenerally better-suited to meeting today’s devel-opment challenges.10

Institutions have affinities for different communication functions.

In the Proderith example discussed earlier, theMexican government and the World Bank beganusing video to facilitate the participatory approachto access farmer’s voice in irrigation planning. Dur-ing the years following the donor’s departure, how-ever, the government gradually turned away fromparticipatory communication-focusing instead onproducing information packages for technologytransfer. This is not really surprising. Most govern-ments are comfortable with the communicationfunctions related to policy and information. Parti-cipatory communication is different and best facil-itated through intermediaries or third parties (such

as NGOs or private consultants) as opposed togovernment functionaries.

Communication strategies in support of program-mes will often borrow elements from several ofthe communication functions. Each project con-text will require a different mix of communicationfunctions and approaches; giving each mix amethodological ‘label’ will become increasinglydifficult in that each combination will reflect alocal adaptation as an integration of disciplinesand stakeholders. It is clear that this is a fertileground for innovation.

In planning a communication strategy, it is impor-tant to understand and acknowledge that differ-ent institutions are comfortable with differenttypes of communication interventions. As noted,it is not always practical to try and get a govern-ment body to implement a participatory process.It may, however, be useful to help governmentdevelop their awareness programs and to encour-age government to work with intermediarygroups (NGOs) to implement the participatoryapproaches.

9 Coldevin, G. 1995. Farmer-first approaches to communication: A case study from the Philippines. FAO: Rome.

10 The publication listed at this end of this paper by Coldevin and FAO is an excellent example of this shift.

17

In the late 1960s, the Premier ofNewfoundland (Canada), Joey Smallwood,decided to move the people from FogoIsland to the mainland. The fishing industry, the main source of income forthe islanders, had run dry. Smallwoodfelt that moving the people off Fogowas the only thing to do to save theislanders. This decision was made with-out any consultation with the islanders.

The National Film Board (NFB) ofCanada decided to choose this time tocome to Newfoundland to film a serieson poverty in Canada. To do this, theNFB joined with the Extension Depart-ment of Newfoundland's Memorial Uni-versity to make a documentary film onthe lives of the islanders. For reasonsthat he later found difficult to explain,the filmmaker (Colin Low) decided to shoot "one-on-one" films whichallowed plenty of time for individuals to tell the full story of their lives on theisland. At the end of the shoot, Lowfound that the individual tapes had an

incredible power as stand-alone pieces.He was reluctant to edit them into theusual documentary form. But what, hewondered, could be done with theselong, individual life stories?

A group of filmmakers, MemorialUniversity personnel, and journalistsmet in Montreal to try to decide what todo with the films. After long discussion,someone suggested that the films beshown to Joey Smallwood and his Cabi-net. The Chancellor of Memorial Uni-versity tried to veto this idea, fearing po-litical repercussions from the controver-sial nature of the material. Nevertheless,those in favour won the day and a seriesof the films were screened for the New-foundland Cabinet in 1972. So power-ful was the impact of the Fogo voice tothe Cabinet that the Fisheries Minister,Aiden Powell, asked to go on film to ex-plain the government's reasons for eva-cuation to the people of Fogo. The filmcarrying Mr. Powell’s address to Fogowas taken to the island and shown to

the people. A series of film discussionstook place culminating in a joint deci-sion. The Fogo Islanders were allowedto remain in their birthplace and thegovernment assisted in the search foralternative industry. To this day, theFogo Islanders remain on the island.

This was the beginning of what isnow widely known as "the FogoProcess." Film was used as a vehicle totransfer ideas back and forth betweendisparate groups, enabling a form of discussion that could never take place ina ‘face-to-face’ situation. Film later gaveway to video (see Kaminiuriak) andbegan to be used as a vehicle for plan-ning, conflict resolution and discussionall over the world. In Mexico, a commu-nication practitioner heard about Fogoand adapted the idea in over 20 projectsin his region. Today, the hand-held videocamera is widely used as a developmentcommunication tool all over the world.

Fogo Island Feedback to Decision-Makers An innovative Use of Film

19

W hat is it that allows some organiza-tions to build development communi-

cation into their organizational structurewhile others seem indifferent to the idea?

We asked this question when interviewing vari-ous institutional “decision-makers” in prepara-tion for this paper. We learned that:

Most organizations value communication inone form or another, particularly in its role asoutreach or public relations – external commu-nication.Many value the role that communication canplay for internal issues such as knowledgemanagement and internal policy development.Some value the growing role of information,communication technologies (ICT) though theyoften mistake the tool for the programme;A small, but growing, group of organizations,has acknowledged the supporting role of com-munication in programme development andimplementation. Some have had communica-tion units within their organizations for at leasta decade (UNICEF, FAO, UNFPA, UNESCO); oth-ers are now in the process of building commu-nication units into their organizational struc-tures (DANIDA, DFID and SIDA).

What brought this about?DANIDA recognized the large amount of atten-tion that was paid to its own organizational needfor communication (public relations and relation-ship with Danish taxpayers). This demonstrationof the importance of communication to the organ-

ization opened the door to decision-makers’ real-ization that communication would also be impor-tant for the implementation of the DANIDA Part-nership 2000 strategy.

DFID came at it differently. They began with adiscussion group on ICTs, which led to an ICTThink Study in 2000. However, work in this areawas fragmented into different sectors (Health,Agriculture, Infrastructure etc.) and was not gen-erally given a high priority within these depart-ments. DFID next undertook a major reorganiza-tion leading to the development of policy teams.This time, a new Director of Information postwas established and the newly recruited Directorrecognized the importance of delivering theMillennium Development Goals. He championedthe work put forward by the policy group, bring-ing this group and it's agenda into DFID'sInformation Division and establishing a signifi-cant programme budget for it’s operation. Theunit is called the Information and Commu-nication for Development Team (ICD). This groupis now developing a strategy, and its programme

Communication:Driving Innovation in OrganizationsWhether the [Millenium] Goals succeed partly depends on the local politicalenvironment - on whether there are avenues for citizens to participate in deci-sion making through formal democratic structures or through direct collectivemobilization and action. UNDP Human Development Report 2003, p. 134

6

Photo byRicardo Ramírez,Mozambique,2001.

is likely to combine information and communica-tion to support programme implementation. Itwill aim to develop evidence-based policy in thearea of Information and Communication forDevelopment (ICD), provide advice to DFID'scountry programmes, and act as an advocacygroup within the international system for ICDteams advocating for the poor.

The DFID ICT Think Study recognized that ICTs,while important, are not a panacea. Rather. theyare tools that need to be put to work and fullyintegrated into Poverty Reduction Strategies torespond to the type of communication needsaddressed in this paper. Infrastructure, accessand use are still limited in developing areas.

Traditional media are still important, and amix of the two media will probably yieldthe best results. (Balit)

20

Considera Project Experience

from Kenya:

The project realized that poor urban women,apart from needing information for theirdevelopment activities, also need to feed backinto policy by way of communicating theirdevelopment needs and requirements to poli-cy-makers at the top. The project strove to cre-ate a two-way information flow system bet-ween poor urban women on the one hand andpolicy makers on the other.

The pilot phase of the project involved theproduction of an interactive video by thewomen. The video was aimed at preservingtheir spoken words and addressing policy-makers on issues of importance to them. Theproject also undertook a literature surveyassessing the relevance of ICTs in strengthen-

Collaborative fishery management workshop, Chile, 2002.

21

The case study is significant in many ways:

1 Women were given focal attention as a sec-tor of the population that is less powerful(gender dimension).

2 The women had power over the media; theycontrolled the tools; they controlled the mes-sage; they began accessing information(power dimension).

3 Video materials were produced, and they wereseen as intermediary products to empowerwomen, provide them with skills and pride,get their message out, and get them engagedin public events (media products as inter-mediary products leading to people’saccomplishments).

4 Simple group media remain relevant and canbe treated as another ICT (ICTs are not justcomputers and Internet).

5 The project embraced the three communica-tion functions: influencing policy-making,informing people about HIV / AIDS, and put-ting communication tools into the hands ofthe users (integration of communicationfunctions).

6 The content of the video was of priority to thewomen (HIV/AIDS).

7 A third video was produced to show the pro-cess of producing the videos (organizationallearning).

8 Community media served as a tool forempowerment, giving the poor a chance tospeak and be heard as opposed to relying onmainstream media (ownership over themedia).

ing poor urban women’s participation andknowledge and identifying methods forreducing the barriers women experience whenaccessing information.

Among the project’s most important outputsare two fifteen-minute videos produced bywomen from Mathare and Redemeed villagesand a third video clearly showing the process.Another is the literature search to access therelevance of ICTs in strengthening poor urbanwomen’s participation and knowledge andmethods for reducing the barriers womenexperience when accessing ICTs.

One of the project’s most important long-termimpacts has been the development of thewomen’s ability to utilize and appreciate moreinformation and communications technolo-gies. The women have gained a new skill thatthey are putting to very good use. They havebeen actively involved in the documentationof their activities and participation in keyevents such as the Women’s Day celebrationsin 2001 and 2002, World AIDS (2001) Day andseveral documentaries. Using the video, theywant to ensure that accurate information getsto everyone on what is going on in the infor-mal settlements. They appreciate their new,more powerful role in society. In cases ofunrest, they are often conferred with and evencalled upon to offer advice.

http://www.cto-ict.org

Are any of these eight significant issuesNOT relevant to a host of developmentmanagement challenges?

While we acknowledge that the question isrhetorical, we want to highlight the difficul-ty organizations encounter when trying tochange rhetoric to practice.

The Development Bank of Southern Africa, forexample, readily accepts that participation andparticipatory communication are integral ele-ments of the development process. The problem,they admit, is that they have not figured out howto change their corporate structure to meet thechallenges posed by participation.

Organizational mission statements and brochuresoften espouse the importance of participationbut fail dismally in the implementation. Budgetshortfalls, unrealistic time-frames and the need todisburse funds quickly can all be serious obstaclesto the creation of an enabling environment forparticipative development. More often than not,the pre-programmed expectations of the donor-agency pre-ordain the focus, scope, timing andbudget of the so-called participatory project.

There are some examples, however, where com-munication approaches have been used to facili-tate open discussion, needs analysis and programidentification by the “host” country without sur-render to a donor-imposed agenda. The instancesare rare but could point the way to future practiceoffering potential for sustainability.

Communication as catalyst

So far, we have been talking about communicationas a support to development programmes andchallenges. Sometimes communication approachesare being used to stimulate discussion and debatearound development issues unrelated to program-me implementation. Recently in the Central AsianRepublics, the World Bank has instigated a range ofstudies, dialogues and consultations around variousthemes confronting the area. Government, civilsociety and communities have been broughttogether to assess issues of HIV /AIDS, governance,income support and so on. Other studies fromcountries with a similar context have been used tohelp participants understand the issues and learnhow others have confronted the problem. Thesediscussion groups have acted as a catalyst to helpaffected groups search for solutions for their owndevelopment challenges.

22

Photo byRicardo Ramírez,Uganda, 2003.

23

In Review

This paper advocates that Development needs innovation

Innovation is the right medium for communicationEffective development needs planned communication inputsCommunication has different functions Communication action needs to be research-based and planned Development initiatives can be shaped by communication interventionsEngaging stakeholders at the start can influence the design of a process.

In order to embrace these opportunities, organizations need to articulate policies to embrace communication

Train staff in communication planning skillsModify budget allocation procedures to include communication planning and implementationBuild flexibility into programmingIntegrate communication into project cycles.

Communication and Participation – Two Sides of the Same Coin

Part of the definition of Development Communication states that "communication and participation aretwo sides of the same coin". In essence, what we are saying is that there cannot be participation with-out some form of communication. To be effective, communication needs to be a planned and researchedactivity to complement any development initiative be it program or project. As development specialistErskine Childers has noted:

If you want development to be rooted in the human beings who have to become theagents of it as well as the beneficiaries – who will alone decide on the kind of develop-ment that they can sustain after the foreign aid has gone away – then you have got tocommunicate with them… if you don’t do that you will continue to have weak or fail-ing development programs. It’s as simple as that.

Erskine Childers, UN analyst and Communication for Development specialist.Source: FAO Video, "Sharing Knowledge," 1991.

24

Recommended ReadingReaders interested in more information are referred to the FAO / IDRC Guidelines on Communication for Development that complement this publication.

Bessette, G. 2003. From information dissemination to community participation. A facilitator’s guide to participatory development communication. Penang: Southbound, and Ottawa: IDRC.

Borrini-Feyerabend, G.; 1996. Collaborative management of protected areas: Tailoring the approach to the context. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Coldevin, G. & FAO, 2003. “Participatory Communication: A Key to Rural Learning Systems”.Rome: FAO.

FAO. 1992. Sharing knowledge: Communication for sustainable development. VHS Video. Rome: FAO.

FAO. 1989. Guidelines on Communication for Rural Development: A brief for developmentplanners and project formulators. Rome: FAO.

Fraser, C. and Restrepo-Estrada, S. 1998. Communicating for development: Human change for survival.London and New York: I.B. Taurus Publishers.

Fraser, C. 1996. Communication for rural development in Mexico – in good times and in bad.Rome: FAO.

Gumucio-Dagrón, A. (ed). 2001. Making waves. Washington: Rockefeller Foundation.

Röling, N.G. 1994. Communication support for sustainable natural resource management. Special issue: Knowledge is power? The use and abuse of information in development. IDS Bulletin 25 (2): 125-133.

White, S.A. (ed). 2003. Participatory Video: Images that Transform and Empower.New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Recommended Websites:DevMedia: Media for development and democracy [ www.devmedia.org ]

FAO Communication for Development [ www.fao.org/sd/KN1_en.htm ]

The Communication Inititative [ www.comminit.com ]

Training Programmes:Malmö University, Sweden [ http://www.k3.mah.se/ComDev/index.htm ]

Isang Bagsak: A distance learning and networking program in participatory development communication[ http://www.isangbagsak.org/pages/intro.html ]

University of the Philippines at los Baños [ http://www.uplb.edu.ph/academics/schools/gs/dp_devcom.html ]