Strategies of Development Communication
(Focus on Participatory Communication Methods)
Unit 2-2.3
Notes by Sis P. Michelle Mathias fsp
Introduction
While the Development Communication in the 60’s focused on Diffusion of Innovation, in the 70’s the focus drifted towards rural development and community development. There were many approaches that came forth. These were all strategies to cater to the process of Development. One such process that grew in importance was the Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA). The primary reason for this is that RRA was designed as a method that collected data from the Local people, their environment, habitat and living conditions. The RRA concept gradually developed into varied Participatory methods due its lack of nature.
Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA)
The History of Participatory Approaches (adapted from G. Beckmann, in Berg et al. 1997) states that RRAs were conducted and facilitated by small groups of RRA specialists and researchers over a one to three day period of workshops conducted for villagers based on the local situation. “Thus, communication processes with illiterate persons not used to communication in abstract terms were carefully considered. Visualisation using locally comprehensible symbols, and tools like mapping, diagramming and ranking were introduced. A limitation of RRA, however, was that it was extractive; the role of the local people was limited to providing information, while the power of decision-making about the use of this information remained in the hands of others”. [1]
However, the one issue with RRA was that locals were consulted only for knowing their situation and garnering information about them, so that specialists could work upon it and arrive at conclusions that led to decision making. This was not participatory in nature, as ultimately, only data was gathered from people, but decisions were in the hands of the agencies and the bureaucracy.
Therefore, towards the 1980’s many NGO’s came up with another unique idea which albeit drew from RRA but was more participatory in nature. This was the emergence of the concept of Participatory Methods. In the long run by 1990s, research and study led to deeper observations of various dimensions of Poverty and standard of living which seemed to be different not just among Human beings, but among Human beings, there was also a difference in development factors between Men and women, socially excluded people and children. Nature too was victimised in the long run due to the greed of humanity and the race for super-fast development. All the issues had to be catered to. We look at the different Participatory Methods that gradually developed over the period of years, in history to cater to the Development of People. These were strategies employed over the years to enable human kind to develop and have a better standard of living.
Participatory Methods (PMs)
While there was a focus on Participatory Methods, it was also important that having understood the needs of the people, through their own voice, sophisticated methods be employed in order to cater to the needs of the community, especially the agricultural community comprising of farmers.
During the 1970’s, Diagramming and visual techniques began to be developed. These were considered highly beneficial in the field of Development communication. Participatory methods in the words of Dr Linda Mayoux, “originated in a number of scientific disciplines interested in analysis of complex systems: biological science, ecology, agricultural economics and geography.”
The primary reason why Visual and Diagramming techniques were appreciated in the process of Development was that, these techniques were very useful in reaching out to a population that in many cases in those years was not literate. Reaching out to the people of this category was easy through Visuals and charts.
Dr. Linda Mayoux in her article on Participatory Methods (PMs), states that PMs were important as they provided relevant information of different elements that catered to the upliftment of communities. The reasons as stated by her include:
• “Complexities of livelihoods and poverty need to be understood in order to decide WHAT is to be assessed. Grassroots participation leads to more relevant identification of impact goals and measurable indicators.
•Different stakeholders are affected by enterprise development in different ways. Participatory methods enable better identification of WHO is affected in which ways. In particular they enable the voices of the very poor, women, children and vulnerable groups to be heard.
•Complexities of development processes need to be understood in order to analyse WHY particular impacts are occurring. Participatory methods enable complex interactions between contexts, grassroots aspirations and strategies, institutional structures and enterprise interventions to be better understood.
•Communication between donors, policymakers, development practitioners and those affected by interventions is needed to identify HOW POLICY CAN BE IMPROVED. Participatory methods facilitate realistic identification of the practical implications of the findings of impact assessment through negotiation between different stakeholders.”[2]
Based on the above elements, one realises that PMs played an important role in the cause of Development. PMs and Participatory Approaches were gradually developed in order to have the people genuinely participate in their own development. The PMs were also called as Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) that focussed on Grassroot participation and visual and diagram techniques. We take a look at a few approaches that emerged.
Participatory Learning and Action (PLA)
PLA was another term for Participatory methods that evolved over a period of years. It became very popular in the 1980s and 1990s, and has since kept its popularity with many CSOs. PRA was originally designed for use during appraisals and needs assessments in rural areas. [3]
Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) is a type of qualitative research, which can be used to gain an in-depth understanding of a community or situation. It is widely used in work involving local communities. PLA is a participatory methodology, and should always be conducted with the full and active participation of community members. The main purpose of PLA is to support people within communities to analyse their own situation, rather than have it analysed by outsiders, and to ensure that any learning is then translated into action (Gosling and Edwards 2003).[4]
Participatory Rural Appraisals (PRA)
RRA gradually gave way to two approaches called Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and Participatory Action Research (PAR) in Development Communication.
PRA encourages People’s participation and involvement in the process of an analysis of the problems. PAR in the words of Nibedita Phukan, “aims at placing communities and local stakeholders in the driving seat of development efforts”.[5]
Dr Linda Mayoux says that RRA “focused on how outsiders could quickly learn from local people about their realities and challenges”; while PRA focussed “on facilitation, empowerment, behaviour change, local knowledge and sustainable action”. [6]
PRA workshops took a few more days as compared to RRA as there was a sharing of results and information presented through open public presentation. “PRAs strongly supported and facilitated the introduction of more demand-responsive ways of managing development interaction, and process-oriented thinking. One of the most important principles in PRA was the sharing of results of analysis, decisions and planning efforts among the community members by open and public presentation during meetings. The latter led to sequential applications of PRA events and assisted follow-up.” [7]This was beneficial to the people in rural areas as it lead them to analyse their own situation and contribute to their own changes for the purpose of growth.
PRA, now used interchangeably with Participatory Learning and Action (PLA), embraces reflection, learning and an understanding of power and relationships.”[8]
Participatory and Integrated Development (PID)
In the 90's, another name for the interactive Participatory Processes that emerged was Participatory and Integrated Development (PID). This process also included workshops and a frame of programme that included long-term institutionalised activities. The programme offered facilitating ventures and support to the community they were reaching out to and "on a demand responsive basis, assisted them in getting their interests represented. For example, getting grassroots level planning and action integrated into local and regional planning approaches." It is also said that in addition to this vertical integration, PID also tries to enhance horizontal integration, i.e. the collaboration of different agencies, sector organisations and different groups of stakeholders within a region.[9]
[1] Introducing Participatory Approaches, Methods and Tools, http://www.fao.org/3/ad424e/ad424e03.htm
[2] Linda Mayoux, Participatory Methods, https://media.ifrc.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2018/08/participatory-methods-_linda-mayoux.pdf
[3] Participatory Learning and Action (PLA), intrac for civil Society, https://www.intrac.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Participatory-learning-and-action.pdf
[4] Participatory Learning and Action (PLA), intrac for civil Society, https://www.intrac.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Participatory-learning-and-action.pdf
[5] Nibedita Phukan, Development Communication - The Emerging Participatory Paradigm, http://www.devalt.org/newsletter/nov09/of_6.htm
[6] Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK, https://www.participatorymethods.org/page/about-participatory-methods, Retrieved:09/09/2020
[7] Introducing Participatory Approaches, Methods and Tools, http://www.fao.org/3/ad424e/ad424e03.htm
[8] Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK, https://www.participatorymethods.org/page/about-participatory-methods, Retrieved:09/09/2020
[9] Introducing Participatory Approaches, Methods and Tools, http://www.fao.org/3/ad424e/ad424e03.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment