Development Communication Policy Science

Development Communication Policy Sciences refers to the development communication and policy sciences. These two branches of social sciences are regarded as distinct and mutually exclusive areas of study but are said to be inextricably linked.[1]

Initially articulated by Nora Quebral in 1971, development communication was defined as the use of communication to facilitate social development.[2] Gonzales (no date) defines development as a "quest for an improved quality of life for all"[3] and communication is used to facilitate changes in people and society so that their full potentials will be realised. Grounded on the mentioned basic meanings of development and communication, development communication is defined as "the use of communication in development work."[4] In 1993, Alexander Flor suggested to refine the definition of development communication including the perspective of cybernetics and general systems theory.[5] In 1995, Alexander Flor claimed development communication as the Fifth Theory of the Press. According to the author, it is the suitable system given "the social and political structures" of the Third World and its present universal environment.[6] In UNESCO's approaches to development communication, Jan Servaes cited "while communication on its own will not bring about change and development, neither will change happen without development communication. We need to integrate all our efforts".[7]Flor & Ongkiko (1998) [8] describe development communication in the book titled ‘Introduction to Development Communication’ as purposive as it primarily uses communication not merely to give information but practically to influence the people- the receivers of information.

In 2001, Quebral redefined development communication as the "art and science of human communication linked to a society's planned transformation from a state of poverty to one of dynamic socio-economic growth that makes for greater equity and the larger unfolding of individual potential".[9] The World Bank views development communication as the "integration of strategic communication in development projects" based on a clear understanding of indigenous realities.[10] In 2006, Bassette defined development communication as a "planned and systematic application of communication resources, channels, approaches and strategies to support the goals of socio–economic, political and cultural development".[11] In 2007, the Rome Consensus gave this definition: "Communication for Development is a social process based on dialogue using a broad range of tools and methods. It is also about seeking change at different levels including listening, building trust, sharing knowledge and skills, building policies, debating and learning for sustained and meaningful change. It is not public relations or corporate communication."[12]

The term "policy sciences" was originally coined by Harold D. Lasswell and Daniel Lerner as an approach to understanding and solving problems that draw on and contribute to all fields of knowledge.[13] It is a set of procedures in an integrated and comprehensive form to help clarify and secure common interests. The term "policy sciences" is in plural form to emphasize its interdisciplinary nature.[14]

In the work of Alexander Flor, the term "development communication policy sciences" was not used as a whole phrase but was mentioned separately as development communication and policy sciences. He discussed the term according to the linkage of development communication and policy sciences as fundamental and traceable even before either area was afforded the status of science.[1]

Communication policy research evolved from the outset as a multi-disciplinary field and domain of various academic disciplines from sociology and political science to law and economics, resulting in the coverage of a myriad of multi-faceted topics. The choice of subjects in communication policy research is affected by sociocultural, political, economic and technological forces that determine the overall framework for communication policy and regulation as well as by the many regulatory objectives in communication.[15]

The place of communication in the development process was given a boost when Lerner (1958) wrote his famous treatise ‘The Passing of the Traditional Society’, in which he acknowledged that mass media growth was one of the three phases of democratic political development (Moemeka, n.d). He pointed out that the mass media had the power to create opportunity for empathy which ‘disciplined western men in skills that spell modernity’.

Development Communication is basically communication for social change to achieve one's potential. This is embodied in Nora Quebral's (1971) definition which states that development communication is the "art and science of human communication applied to the speedy transformation of a country and the mass of its people from poverty to a dynamic state of economic growth that makes possible greater social equity and the larger fulfillment of the human potential." Quebral (2001) redefined development communication to "the art and science of human communication linked to a society's planned transformation from a state of poverty to one of dynamic socio-economic growth that makes for greater equity and the larger unfolding of individual potential."

An important and founding impetus for communication policy research came from Harold D. Lasswell, who also figures prominently as a founding father of communication science and policy science (Rogers 1994). He argued that future advances in communication study depended upon the development of a policy focus and upon being a third voice supplying 'a competing appraisal of the images spread by self-serving sources' (Lasswell 1972:307).

The conception of the policy sciences on the other hand, is more refined and extended today than at any time in the colorful history of man (Lasswell, 1971).[16] Giving a working definition for it, he noted that policy sciences are concerned with knowledge of and in the decision processes of the public and civic order.

Development Communication and the Policy Sciences

Although development communication and the policy sciences, according to Flor (1991), are generally regarded as two distinct and mutually exclusive fields of study, the two stem from the same principle: the need to actively apply knowledge from and principles of the social sciences in solving societal problems under the conditions of social change.

Flor and Ongkiko (1998), in their book- Introduction to Development Communication, state that development communication is purposive as it primarily uses communication not merely to give information but practically to influence the people- the receivers of information. Coyle (2008), in his article- Theory of Development Communication, articulates that where people have options to change their ways of life, communication becomes important in informing, persuading, listening, data gathering, educating, training and managing change. Communication then becomes an instrument in facilitating changes in people in order for them to realize their full potentials. Through it, people would improve their ways of thinking, their ways of acting and their ways of living resulting in a higher quality of life.

Similarly, policy sciences are purposive as these are anchored on the fulfillment of the aim of improving policy making to provide, as highlighted by Flor (1991), as much “lead time” as necessary in the solution of societal problems. Policy analysts or policy scientists have to be driven in their pursuit of effectively designing, formulating, analyzing, evaluating policies and most importantly of studying the policy making process in order to create a substantive impact on policymakers. Through communication, they would be able to exert a great influence in the decision making process of the policy makers who are responsible in making policies that would become the guiding principles in resolving concerns, dilemmas or issues with the end in view of effecting societal changes.

Communication is therefore central to development communication and policy sciences. As Allen (1978), cited by Flor (1991), states:

"Since communication permeates every facet of a person's behavior, the study of communication is no less than one way to study policy making. Communication is a useful concept, precisely because it is one more handle whereby we can effectively study policy making. Communication is one of those few variables through which any policy decision is dependent."[17]

Communication and Policy Sciences link in Societal Change

Undeniably, development communication and the policy sciences are generally regarded as inextricable links in recognizing change in the society. Their engaged roles encourage and support research, practice, and education, and disseminate knowledge and information for the people through various means of communication. Such engagement leads to this further focus on these two's main target: Change. The Rome Consensus emphasized that for significant progress, development policies should integrate communication for development and strengthen communication capacity within countries and development organisations at all levels.[12]

It has been widely established that mass media could fetch and cater education, essential skills, social harmony, and a desire to reach modernization. As stipulated in Walt Rostow's theory in Boado's[18] (2000) article, societies progress through specific stages of development on their way to modernity, "the age of high mass consumption." Meanwhile, Lerner suggested that exposure to media would generate empathy for modern culture, and a desire to move from long-established to contemporary ways.[19] However, one needs to be made to understand the fallacy of the notion that communication is an all-embracing area.

Being the most used tool for development communication, mass media technologies have become the eyes and hands of the society in examining its social conditions, and to dissect and plot solutions through policy sciences, accordingly. In fact, in some instances, mass media technologies, including television, have been magic multipliers of development benefits. Educational television has been used effectively to supplement the work of teachers in classrooms in the teaching of literacy and other skills, but only in well designed programs which are integrated with other educational efforts. This insight regarding the integration of technology in the education set up basically creates a step-on-the-ladder of achieving change and development.

Development Communication, Policy Advocacy, and Governance'

Since media and communication play a critical role in development, relevant communication policies are important for good governance to succeed. People engagement and participation in policy advocacy through dialogue are important to gain trust, acceptance, and cooperation from all stakeholders. According to Jan Servaes (2010),since public policies must be viewed as an integral part of the social and economic development process, the kind of advocacy that is ideal is that which is participatory.[20] The focus in this approach is on ‘listening’ and ‘cooperation’ rather than on ‘telling what to do’ and presumes a dynamic two-way approach to communication.

In general, one can distinguish between (a) advocacy for policy design and decision-making aimed at ensuring political, social and legislative support for development issues (e.g. protection of the environment); and (b) advocacy for policy implementation which requires intensive efforts for mobilizing social forces, individuals and groups for development actions. Both are important and must be addressed. The aim in advocacy strategies is to foster political and public engagement as well as professionals in development issues through the process of social mobilization. There is no universal approach which can be used in all circumstances, flexibility is required in selecting appropriate strategies.[21]

The communication media are critical in creating awareness, generating public interest and demand, and placing the issue on the public agenda and building social support. They can play two kinds of advocacy roles: (a) they can support development initiatives by the dissemination of messages that encourage the public to support development-oriented projects; and (b) they can provide decision makers with the information and feedback needed to reach a decision. Policymakers usually respond to popular appeal, to pressure groups, and to their own social network of policy- and decision-makers. Therefore, advocacy, political commitment, and supportive policies are often themselves a product of social support systems and empowerment of people. Advocacy should, therefore, be viewed in conjunction with social support and empowerment strategies.[22]

Jan Servaez (2009) affirms that the importance of a free and balanced flow of information to an engaged civil society, through independent media and transparent government, has long been acknowledged. He sees that communication plays a pivotal role in improving governance in developing countries.[23]

Governance may be defined as: (1) the process by which governments are selected, monitored and replaced, (2) the capacity of the government to formulate and implement sound policies effectively, (3) the respect of citizens and the state for the institutions that govern economic, political, and social interactions among them, and (4) the capacity for active and informed economic, social, and political dialogue among citizens within a public sphere.[24]

Governance implies the ways through which citizens and groups in a society voice their interests, mediate their differences and exercise their legal rights and obligations. Good governance includes notions of greater participation by civil society in decision making, instituting the rule of law, anti-corruption, transparency, accountability, poverty reduction and human rights. Good governance links government to the notion of responsibility for and to the citizenry as opposed to the traditional idea of authority over a nation—legitimacy emanating from popular assent to and participation in government, which is concerned with the welfare of its citizens.[24]

The role of the media in promoting good governance is clear. All aspects of good governance are facilitated by a strong and independent mediascape within a society. Only when journalists are free to monitor, investigate and criticize the public administration’s policies and actions can good governance take hold. Independent media are like a beacon that should be welcomed when there is nothing to hide and much to improve. Indeed, this is the concrete link between the functioning of the media and good governance—the media allow for ongoing checks and assessments by the population of the activities of government and assist in bringing public concerns and voices into the open by providing a platform for discussion. Instead, all too often governments devise laws and informal means of keeping their activities hidden from public view or only available to media favorable to their viewpoint. In recent years, many governments have tried to co-opt journalists by paying part of their salaries or by giving them certain kinds of access on the condition that they will not report from other perspectives. If the media are to function in the public interest, governments have to protect the independent functioning of the media and allow various viewpoints to flourish in society.[25]

A key aspect of governance is how citizens, leaders, and public institutions relate to each other in order to make change happen (Haider Huma, et al., 2011).[26] Communication structures ensure the two-way exchange of information between state and citizens, It allows the citizens to enter into dialogue with the state on policies issues that matter to them. This environment develops trust between state and society which lays the foundation of good governance.

Development communication has brought to the fore the evolution of communication for development (C4D)which has mirrored broader shifts in theories and models of economic and social development. For much of the post-World War II period, C4D was informed by the ‘modernization’ paradigm, which sought to transform ‘traditional’ societies into modern, Western societies through the transmission of attitudes, practices and technologies. Correspondingly, communication initiatives adopted a diffusion approach, which uses communication to carry out a transfer of information. This includes large-scale media campaigns, social marketing, dissemination of printed materials, ‘education-entertainment’ and other forms of one-way transmission of information from the sender to the receiver. Proponents of diffusion theory recognised the limitations of mass media, however, in promoting sustained behavioral change. The theory also incorporated interpersonal communication: face-to-face communication that can either be one-on-one or in small groups. The objectives are to share information, respond to questions, and motivate specific behavioral practices. The belief is that while mass media allows for the learning of new ideas, interpersonal networks encourage the shift from knowledge to continued practice.[27]

Criticism of the modernization paradigm grew in the 1970s and 1980s. The one-way flow of information and communication from the North to the South was criticized alongside calls for greater representation of voices from the South. At the same time, there was a push for more ‘participatory’ approaches to development. This triggered the emergence also of participatory development communication, which aims to empower the community towards collective decision-making and action through enhanced knowledge and skills to identify, prioritise and resolve problems and needs. Communication for development has thus come to be seen as a way to amplify voice, facilitate meaningful participation, and foster social change. The 2006 World Congress on Communication for Development defined C4D as ‘a social process based on dialogue using a broad range of tools and methods. It is also about seeking change at different levels including listening, building trust, sharing knowledge and skills, building policies, debating and learning for sustained and meaningful change’. Such two-way, horizontal approaches to communication include public hearings, debates, deliberations and stakeholder consultations, participatory radio and video, community-based theatre and storytelling,and web forums. Diffusion and participatory approaches have been increasingly integrated or adopted in parallel in C4D initiatives. Such combinations allow agencies to reach broad audiences through large-scale campaigns while promoting local community development, empowerment and ownership through participation.[28]

However, while the role of communication in supporting development, and stimulating economic growth has increasingly been recognized in international policy statements, communication is relatively under-prioritized in the ‘good governance’ agenda. Some attribute this to a lack of robust evidence demonstrating communication’s impact on governance, others argue it is more fundamentally a question of whether giving support to communication – which typically encompasses the development of an independent media sector, improving access to information, and the strategic use of media and political communication tools to influence behavior and social change – is a legitimate area for donor funding, given the often highly political nature of such interventions. What is clear is that the available research on the role of communication in governance is fragmented across multiple disciplines with often conflicting priorities (including political science, communications, media studies, and development studies). At the same time, there has been a dearth of practical guidance available to policymakers on understanding and using communication in governance reform.[29]

In spite of its relative under-prioritisation in development assistance, few dispute the power of communication, and in particular the catalytic role of the media, in influencing governance relationships and processes: communication is widely seen as vital for connecting states with society, facilitating inclusive political systems, giving ‘voice’ to poor and marginalised groups, and enabling citizen participation and social accountability. Communication advocates also argue that the strategic use of political communication tools and methodologies can influence the attitudes, opinions and behaviour of key stakeholders and secure the political will necessary for reforms to be successful on the ground. With the recent rise of the fragile states agenda, there has been increased academic and donor interest inhow communication can contribute to state-building by improving state-citizen relationships and helping to (re)build social contracts in conflict-affected states.[29]

The intertwining relationship of development communication, policy advocacy, and governance is aptly described in the concept of strategic communication of GIZ, a Germany-based international non-governmental organization. In 2006, the GIZ, (then the GTZ) published in 2006 an article on Strategic Communication for Sustainable development: A Conceptual Overview which is summarized here below:[30]

Strategic communication is not just disseminating information; it is the active gathering of stakeholders’ views. It is a pre-requisite and an instrument of effective policy making and public participation, facilitating information exchange and establishing consensus among divergent opinions and interests. It facilitates the building of know-how, decision making and action capacities at the heart of the delicate cooperation between government, civil society groups, and the private sector. Both internal and external factors influencing human communication require consideration. Internal factors include norms and values, attitudes and behaviour. External factors include the ‘vehicles’ that bring the material to the target audience. Five branches of strategic communication are particularly applicable to sustainable development:

Development and environmental communication: Breaking down complex information into understandable elements in a socio-culturally relevant way for different audiences is a prerequisite for consensus building and change. A particularly successful model is the problem-oriented, participatory and focused Strategic Extension Campaign (SEC) developed by FAO. Social marketing: This involves gathering input from intended beneficiaries to design communication campaigns promoting socially beneficial practices or products in a target group. Audience segmentation is a crucial element. Non-formal and environmental education: These involve promoting awareness, values and attitudes, skills and behaviour for sustainable development and effective participation in decision-making. Civil society mobilisation: This involves listening as well as ‘talking’, and combines vertical and horizontal social interaction through community-controlled media. Conflict management and negotiation: Mediation, conciliation or arbitration can help to address communication deadlocks and power imbalances, and increase trust. In 2007, Coffey International Development of London published The Role of Communication in Governance: Detailed Analysis.[31] This paper analyses the positive and negative contributions of communication to governance. In theory, effective communication can help to promote good governance; however, a solid evidence base is lacking and a positive correlation should not be assumed. Existing studies suggest that it is not enough to create the means of communication; enabling factors must be in place so that voices can be heard and citizens can hold the government to account. Here below is the summary of this paper:

"If good governance requires an inclusive public space based on informed dialogue and debate, a positive relationship between communication and governance seems plausible. However, communication can further poor governance (when used to protect the state rather than serve as a voice for the people, for example, or when subject to elite capture). In addition, it is difficult to establish a clear evidence base to support positive connections between communication and governance. There are also challenges relating to causality where the link between communication and governance is thought to be reciprocal; for example, communication may help to promote good governance, but a freer government may also promote participation and communication."[31]

Policy Engagement in Development Communication

Policy engagement in development communication is essential. From the start, development communication practitioners must build relationships with those they seek to inform, influence, and work together with for change. Policy scientists, in turn, must constantly look at how they will move their knowledge not just outward to broad audiences, but directly into practice.

The rationale for policy engagement in development communication is well understood:

The participatory approach in policy engagement is key in ensuring that the public and stakeholders have been involved at various stages. Waisbord (2002)[32][33] presented the paradigm shift of development communication from the dominant paradigm of Modernism theories which focus on behavior change models to the more critical Dependency and Participatory theories and approaches. According to Waisbord (2002), participatory theories considered necessary a redefinition of development communication and one set of definitions stated that it (development communication) is the "systematic utilization of communication channels and techniques to increase people's participation in development and to inform, motivate, and train rural populations mainly at the grassroots."

Mefalopulos (2008), author of the book "Development Communication Sourcebook: Broadening the Boundaries of Communication" points out the importance of "meaningful and significant participation" which is made possible mainly through communication. The author observes that "many development programs, including community-driven ones seem not to pay similar attention to participation and communication." He notes that "while paying attention to participation,communication which is intended as the professional use of dialogic methods and tools to promote change as an aspect is overlooked" (p. 7). These views further advance that dialogues and interactions among various stakeholders are crucial in the participatory approach of policy making.

Wilson (2007) further stated that, "All forms of participation are essentially communication processes."[33] In a society, communication contributes to healthy political processes whether in drafting policies or keeping governments in check. Flor (2011)[6] identified that the interplay of interests of "the government, the education sector, the communication industry, the private sector, the church, foreign vested interests and the consumers" make up the stakeholders of communication policy. In line with this, the inter-relatedness of societal problems using the problematique technique points out that the different sectors of the society should be encouraged to participate in policy-making. In this manner, policy-making becomes participatory in nature.

Consequently, Lagerwey’s (1990)[34] assertion on the importance of DevCom as a ‘discipline born out of people’s need for information and education that brought about planned growth intended for human think critically, cultivate proper attitudes, skills and values, and contribute to the welfare of the community development' paves way for policy scientists to come into picture, utilize these information and communication to improve society’s desire for social, economic, and political changes and engage in the decision-making process with sound judgment. As it assists developmental and national goals, the scope of DevCom motivates individuals to become productive and engaged stakeholders.

Eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, n.d).[35] In fact, the convening of the high-level representatives and heads of states from the different part of the world that gave birth to the so-called ‘Sustainable Development Goals’ or SDGs in 2015 seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom, is resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty, heal and secure our planet, and is determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path.

The need to translate the principles of policy sciences into the helm of development is a challenge to policy makers. As coined by Harold Lasswell, policy sciences draw on and contribute to all fields of knowledge (PSC, Inc).[36] This is because the variety of problems and issues to which the policy sciences have been applied is vast and thus, helping people make better decisions is the central objective of the policy sciences, it pointed out.

Communication policy science

Communication policy science involves the communication policy making of an organization intended members of a society, mostly the media consumer. It can initiate media education in the formal or nonformal modes; facilitate in the conduct of research and development outfits; establish a network involving the church, academic, communities and cause-oriented groups; and can be used by politicians as "think tanks" serving the government.

Communication policy

Communication policy pertains to the set of norms established to guide, regulate, and influence the communication processes to include various interpersonal communication activities within the context of various development sectors such as health and education and also the behavior of mass communication media. Such policies do not only guide the behaviors and activities of institutions operating various media channels but also other services and factors involved in interpersonal and social communications.

"Communication Policy" is the merging of two concepts: communication and policy' According to Mwaura (1980)[37] and Udomisor (2009 in Udomisor and Akoje (2013),[38] communication policy refers to the "sets of principles and norms established to guide the behaviour of communication systems. They are shaped over time in the context of society’s general approach to communication and to the media. Emanating from political ideologies, the social and economic conditions of the country and the values on which they are based, they strive to relate these to the real needs for and the prospective opportunities for communication". A framework that ensures the members and stakeholders of the organization of their roles and responsibilities as fully informed individuals and communication practitioners, this policy reflects not only the communication infrastructure[39] and channel but more on its supporting capability in the ‘systematic planning, development and use of the communication system, and its resources and possibilities, and for ensuring that they function efficiently in enhancing national development’ (National Resource Management and Environment Department, 2002).[40][41] Communication policy needs conscious involvement at several levels: Government executive, legislative bodies, authorities in charge of social and economic planning, individual, ministries and their planning boards, communication enterprises, professional organizations, the citizen, the social scientist, and economists.[42]

Digitalisation needs an active communications policy because it will serve as tools for an effective and efficient delivery of service in both the private and public sector. Today, there is an increasing attention to the utilisation of information and communications technology and digital services in the promotion of employment and economic growth.

Communication policy analysis

In the performance of development communication and policy science studies, a communication policy analysis is developed. The analyst performs proactive posture, focusing on development communication. Several methods were mentioned in the works of Flor (1991) such as: communication technology assessment, social cost benefit analysis, problematique analysis, scenario construction, and policy delphi.

One of the policy analysis methods discussed by Flor (1991) is the Communication Technology Assessment (CTA) technique which measures the impact of a particular technology to the individuals and society. The result of the assessment serves as the basis for qualifying which technology can be adopted, which ones are constructive, and which are deemed damaging to the society.[6] On the other hand, the Collingridge dilemma questions the impact of technology assessment in general. It argues that we can only predict the effect of technology if they are extensively developed and widely used in the society. However, the implication of such wide testing and application can lead to difficulties in controlling and changing the technology that has already been embedded in the society.

According to Flor (1991), Scenario Construction and Analysis could be used in analysing communication policy. Scenario is a description technique that has been attracting a lot of attention from practitioners and from researchers. Several disciplines have been using scenarios for some time now, but recently the information system community has dedicated special attention to the possibilities that this description technique provides to enhance understandability of task-related descriptions and communicability among stakeholders.[43]

Scenario construction is an assessment of what could happen in the future based on input assumptions. It is not a prediction of what will happen in the future, and is therefore an ideal tool to use to create thought provoking content in markets and sectors that have many variable influences. A scenario report can be deterministic or stochastic, historical or hypothetical. Analysis based on deterministic scenarios typically considers just a few scenarios which might be historical or hypothetical. Although, scenarios tend to be mostly quantitative, they can be used to develop alternative views of the future that are meant to offer strategic thinking about how a company might best respond to rapid changes in the business environment. These scenarios, developed through an internal and external review process, are qualitative and descriptive.[44]

Bridging research and policy

There is a need to bridge research and policy especially the science-policy interface. Research and Policy in Development (RAPID) programme focuses to increase the use of research in development policy. John Young, one of the originators of RAPID, states that "Research, policy and practice is complex, multifactoral, non-linear, and highly context specific."[45] Jones and Walsh (2008)[46] conducted a research which focused on how information is accessed for development policy making. In this work Jones and Walsh (2008) identified 11 major obstacles to making use of available scientific information in development policy making: scientific understanding of policy makers is low, limited openness by politicians, lack of dissemination of research findings, lack of incentives, lack of institutional channels for incorporation, economic and social data more relevant to policy making, scientific research findings not relevant to policy, scientific data not perceived as credible evidence, jargon does not correspond with policy environment, too little scientific information available, and too much scientific information available.

Approaches to Evaluating Impacts and Outcomes

The task of evaluating impacts and outcomes of development communication, or its new form, communication for development (C4D) is as complex as the issues it tries to solve. It requires a shift from the traditional results-based approaches that put premium on accountability to funding institutions to more innovative, complexity-based approaches that allow for greater stakeholder participation. Evaluating C4D calls for more flexible techniques other than the quantitative and linear evaluation approaches.

The new approach acknowledges the contextual challenges and issues attendant to development interventions. Among the issues identified are the changing information and communication landscape, geographic and cultural barriers, need for compliance to requirements of funding agencies, political instability, among others.

Other issues identified from the survey responses for the Inter-Agency Resource Pack includes insufficiency of time, funding and resources, highlighting the need for more time to design evaluation tools for diverse programs, lack of capacity, awareness of research, evaluation and social change and for designing and implementing M&E, and the prevailing preference for more quantitative approaches even if these are found wanting in surfacing answers to deeper,fundamental questions.

Lennie noted that there are also issues with attribution,because impacts cannot readily be attributed to C4D given the complexity of issues, and because the programs are shared by a number of partner agencies working together towards a larger development initiative.[47]

See also

References

  1. 1 2 Flor, A. (1991). "Development Communication and the Policy Sciences." Asian Institute of Development Communication (Kuala Lumpur). Journal of Development Communication.
  2. ↑ Policy Sciences Library
  3. ↑ Velasco, 1999, p. 2
  4. ↑ Velasco, 1999, p. 10
  5. ↑ Flor, Alexander (1993). "Upstream and Downstream Interventions in Environmental Communication". Institute of Development Communication.
  6. 1 2 3 Flor, Alexander G. (1991). "Development Communication and the Policy Sciences". Journal of Development Communication. Asian Institute of Development: Kuala Lumpur.
  7. ↑ Jan Servaes, ed. (2002). "Approaches to development communication" (PDF). Unesco.org. Retrieved November 2, 2016.
  8. ↑ Development Communication and the Policy Sciences. Journal of Development Communication. Asian Institute of Development: Kuala Lumpur
  9. ↑ Quebral, N.C. (1971). "What Do We Mean by 'Development Communication'?" International Development Review. 15(2): 25–28.
  10. ↑ Manyozo, Linje (March 2006). "Manifesto for Development Communication: Nora C. Quebral and the Los Baños School of Development Communication". Asian Journal of Communication 16 (1): 79–99. doi:10.1080/01292980500467632
  11. ↑ Bassette, Guy. 2006. People, Land, and Water: Participatory Development Communication for Natural Resource Management. London: Earthscan and the International Development Research Centre.
  12. 1 2 The Rome Consensus Communication for Development A Major Pillar for Development and Change
  13. ↑ Quebral, N.C. (2001). "Development Communication in a Borderless World". "Paper presented at the national conference-workshop on the undergraduate development communication curriculum, "New Dimensions, Bold Decisions"". Continuing Education Center, UP Los Banos: Department of Science Communication, College of Development Communication, University of the Philippines Los Banos, pp 15–28.
  14. ↑ Allen (1978), cited in Flor, Alexander (1991).
  15. ↑ Just, Natascha; Puppis, Manuel (2012). Trends in Communication Policy Research: New Theories, Methods and Subjects. Intellect Books. ISBN 978-1-84150-467-4.
  16. ↑ Harold D. Lasswell (1971). "A Pre-View of Policy Sciences" (PDF). Policysciences.org. Retrieved November 2, 2016.
  17. ↑ Ongkiko, I. and Flor, A. (1998). Dev Com and the Policy Sciences. Introduction to Development Communication. UP Open University and South East Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture.
  18. ↑ Boado, P. G. (2000). The Need for Self-Directed Learning. Phil: CLSU Research Vista
  19. ↑ Lerner, D. (1958) "The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East." New York: Free Press.
  20. ↑ Servaes, Jan; Mai, Chiang (19 October 2009). "Media for Social Transformation: Advocacy for Peace". www.academia.edu.
  21. ↑ Jan Servaes, 1993. Development communication in action: Report of the Inter-Agency Meeting on Advocacy Strategies for Health and Development. WHO Conference, Geneva, 9–13 November 1992, World Health Organisation (WHO), Geneva, p. 5.
  22. ↑ Servaes, 2009, p. 55.
  23. ↑ Servaes, 2009, p. 50.
  24. 1 2 Servaes, 2009, p. 64.
  25. ↑ Barry James (2005). Media and good governance, UNESCO.
  26. ↑ Huma, 2011, p. 10.
  27. ↑ Huma, 2011, p. 8.
  28. ↑ Huma, 2011, pp 7-8
  29. 1 2 Huma, 2011, p. 9
  30. ↑ GIZ (2006) Strategic Communication for Sustainable development: A Conceptual Overview.
  31. 1 2 "The Role of Communication in Governance: Detailed Analysis", Coffey International Development, London, 2007.
  32. ↑ Waisbord, S. 2002. Family Tree of Theories, Methodologies and Strategies in Development Communication. The Rockefeller Foundation.
  33. 1 2 Mark Wilson (2007). "At the heart of change" (PDF). Panos.org.uk. Retrieved November 2, 2016.
  34. ↑ Lagerwey, F. C. (1990). Introduction to development communication: Its philosophy and approach. In Communication Foundation for Asia: Media for Total Human Development. Retrieved http://cfamedia.org/main/?p=2427.
  35. ↑ "Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development .:. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform". sustainabledevelopment.un.org. 2015. Retrieved November 2, 2016.
  36. ↑ "Policy Sciences". Policysciences.org. Retrieved November 2, 2016.
  37. ↑ Maura, P. (1980). Communication Policies in Kenya, UNESCO
  38. ↑ Udomisor, I. W., and Akoje, S.P.E. (2013). Religion as a repository of Nigeria national communication policy. In New Media and Mass Communication, 16, 88-94.
  39. ↑ Hirschman, A. (1958). 10.1111/b.9781405131995.2008.x International encyclopedia of communication.
  40. ↑ National Resource Management and Environment Department. (2002, April). "Methodologies for Designing and Implementing Multimedia Communication Strategies and National Communication Policies". In The Design and Implementation of National Information and Communication Policies for Sustainable Development in Africa: Issues and Approaches . A bilingual regional workshop conducted at Niamey, Niger
  41. ↑ UNESCO (1972). Working Paper for the Meeting of Experts on Communication Policies and Planning. Paris: UNESCO
  42. ↑ Lee, John A. R. (1976). "Towards realistic communication policies : recent trends and ideas".The UNESCO Press.
  43. ↑ Leite, J., Hadad, G., Doom, J & Kaplan, G.“A Scenario Construction Process. Requirements Engineering, July 2000, Volume 5, Issue 1
  44. ↑ “Scenario Construction and Analysis.” Retrieved from http://www.eliteeconomics.com/services/scenario-construction-analysis
  45. ↑ Overseas Development Institute. (2013). "Research & Policy Development."
  46. ↑ Jones, Nicola and Walsh, Cora, (2008). Policy Briefs as a communication tools for development research. Background Note, Overseas Development Institute, 8 pages.
  47. ↑ Lennie, J. and J. Taachi (2015). Tensions, Challenges and Issues in Evaluating Communication for Development. Nordic Review, 36.

Sources

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/2/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.