Archive for January, 2009

“Otra comunicación para otro desarrollo” by Eduardo Gularte Cosenza, Cristian Ozaeta Calderón and Gabriela Díaz Salazar is a new resource on communication for development. It is not a coincidence that this publication has the same title as the book Rosa Maria Alfaro wrote on the experience of Calandria, the Peruvian communication collective, since the fact of reflecting on “another” communication inevitably leads to rethinking “another” development, given that the one we know has failed to deliver.

The launching of the book took place at Sophos bookstore, in Guatemala City, on January 23rd, and was presented by Ileana Alamilla Director of CERIGUA and Alfonso Gumucio Dagron, Director of the Communication for Social Change Consortium. CECODE is a specialised NGO and not an academic institution, however this publication adds to those that can be used in studies on communication for development and social change, which are part of the University Network in various regions.

Eduardo Gularte

Communication for development is not a new topic but has been covering larger spaces of debate in recent years. The culmination was the World Congress of Communication for Development (WCCD) organised by the World Bank, the Communication Initiative and FAO late in October of 2006, in Rome. The outcome of that event, “The Rome Consensus“, is in spite of it concision a very important call to all development organisations to understand this “other” communication.

Five aspects are of relevance in CECODE’s publication: 1) communication should not be only understood as institutional visibility and public relations; 2) communication is a horizontal and inclusive process; 3) alternative communication stands against the mainstream which is plagued with commercial and political interests; 4) communication that restores the real meaning of the terms we use; and 5) communication that rejects the mercantilism of mass media.

The “other” development that Gularte points to in his analysis is human development as defined by the United Nations: “a process that widens individual and collective liberties and offers a range of alternatives so people can build upon, select and reach full and creative lives, according to their capacities and values…” In other words, another development is the one that guarantees full respect of all human rights.

Cristian Ozaeta

Hence the need of communication as a human right that allows communities to have their own voice and increasingly participate in making decisions on the issues that affect their lives and development. Sustainability of development programmes and projects is directly related to community participation. And the rewards are not only for those we sometimes call “beneficiaries” but to development agencies that would like to see their programmes sustained, and impact on the long run.

Alfonso Gumucio

This book contributes in a didactic way towards a better knowledge of communication for development in the context of Guatemala; it is a useful and needed text for those studying communication, the one that is not limited to journalism or public relations. CECODE, the organisation founded two years ago by the authors of this publication, revisits the international debate on communication for development and takes it to a country that has been generally much closed on itself on these issues.

 

For more information on the book, contact Eduardo Gularte.

Our colleagues of the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) issued last year the report on the “Champions of Participation” workshop which is an important resource for the University Network and can be downloaded from the web.

John Gaventa of the “Participation, Power and Social Change” team at IDS was the lead convener and facilitator of the workshop, held in May 2007, which brought together 44 people (24 from the UK and 20 from 14 other countries1) involved in local government work. They comprised elected officials, including mayors from the Philippines and Brazil; city councillors from New Orleans and UK authorities; local government officials and other service providers; community activists; workers from local and national NGOs; academics and representatives of central government in the UK and in India.

The aim was to look at the challenges local governments face in responding to growing demands for citizen engagement and more participatory forms of governance.  This report summarises the discussions and debates held over a five-day period which included a two-day workshop, two days of visiting sites in the UK of particular interest, and one day of policy dialogue with UK policymakers in the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) and the Department for International Development (DFID).

The experiences and innovative approaches included:

      Participatory approaches to budgeting which provide more transparent methods for allocating public resources, involving citizens, elected representatives and local government officials, such as in Porto Alegre in Brazil, Malaga in Spain and Bradford, Newcastle and Salford in the UK;

      Processes of participatory planning, which range from public involvement in the construction of small community-based projects, to larger neighbourhood action plans, to strategic area planning and the building of an entire city as in the case of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, or in human rights participatory planning in postwar Bosnia and Herzegovina;

      New forms of partnerships between citizens, the government and other stakeholders, as in the UK Local Strategic Partnerships (LSP) and at neighbourhood level through local agreements, or in places like Brazil and the Philippines where citizens and officials sit as ‘co-governors’on key decision-making bodies;

      New forms of public scrutiny to hold elected representatives and government officials to account, ranging from local scrutiny groups in Shropshire, citizen-led organizations holding independent public forums with politicians in East London, and citizen monitoring of public tenders in Chile;

      New methods of consultation and inclusion, such as community study circles in Wisconsin, USA, and community radio and mobile phone feedback in Nigeria; 

      Opportunities for citizen participation in service delivery, such as housing, employment and community safety service through neighbourhood renewal and tenant management programmes in the UK; delivery of healthcare in Brazil and education in the Philippines.

———

During the coming weeks we will be catching up in this blog with the activities that members of the University Network have been implementing and that we have not had the opportunity to portray in due time.

We will refer here to an academic activity organized last September 2008 by the Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, a founding member of the University Network represented through Erick Torrico, Director of the Master Degree on Strategic Communication. Karina Herrera-Miller, one of the Professors at the Master has sent us information related to the Communication for Social Change Forum, where 22 students participated and was facilitated by Alfonso Gumucio Dagron from the Communication for Social Change Consortium.

Prof. Herrera-Miller says that “the experience was highly positive because of the exchanges and discussion around this approach that helps to understand and use communication in development. The stories and points of view from Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Dominican Republic, Colombia and Costa Rica -countries where participants are located- were articulated to agree on the strategic importance of establishing participatory communication processes from and with community groups, and to jointly define parameters of development and social change.”

“These virtual fora that have been implemented within each module of the Master degree cover specific themes. This was the first on communication for social change and a pioneer initiative to call in an expert who could promote challenging points of view and helped to deepen the discussion. Alfonso Gumucio contributed to the understanding of the main concepts and strategies of communication for social change, thus promoting a highly motivated and critical participation of the students”, - says Herrera-Miller.

In view of this encouraging experience, the Universidad Andina Simon Bolivar and the Communication for Social Change Consortium are willing to join efforts during 2009 and continue collaborating with each other.

Once a month, we will briefly portray in this blog one of the institutions that are part of the University Network, and of course those that will be joining the network in the future.

To start the year, we have selected the College of Development Communication (CDC) which is part of the University of The Philippines at Los Baños campus in Laguna. The reason is simple: this is the oldest academic institution in the world providing specialized studies in communication for development, and the only one that does it at Bachelor, Master and PhD levels.

Even more, the CDC was our host in September 2005 when 15 universities from all over the world decided to get together in a network of all those specialized in communication for development and social change. Maria Celeste Habito-Cadiz, then Dean of the College, has been member of the international board of the Communication for Social Change Consortium.

The College is recognized as the pioneer in development communication teaching in the world. It has trained faculty members of state universities and colleges in the Philippines and in other countries in the Asia-Pacific region for their higher degrees in development communication. In 1999, the College was named as one of two CHED national centers of excellence in communication. The Bachelor of Science in Development Communication (BSDC) degree program has set a trend and is now the model for similar degree programs implemented by other academic institutions in the Philippines and other developing countries as well.

This itinerary started in 1954 -55 years ago and counting- as the Office of Extension and Publications under the then UP College of Agriculture (UPCA). In 1962 it was upgraded into the Department of Agricultural Information and Communication (DAIC), having offered the first communication course in the country under the Bachelor of Science in Agriculture curriculum. By 1968 the department was renamed as the Department of Agricultural Communication and in 1974 it became the Department of Development Communication. It was the first to offer degree programs in development communication in the world. Its growth continued in 1987 when the department was elevated into an institute (Institute of Development Communication). Finally, on 18 December 1998 the College of Development Communication was created.

The objectives of the College of Development Communication are to (1) provide higher education for students who will pursue careers in development communication practice, teaching or research; (2) investigate the interrelationships between human development and the processes and structures of communication with emphasis on research that promotes equity, empowerment, environmental sustainability, peace and human rights; and (3) undertake training, advisory and action projects that help build up the communication capabilities and resources of people, communities, institutions and other participants in the development process. There is much more information on the academic programme in their new brand website.

The word “glocal” is hype in social sciences literature; it attempts to include the contradictory and at the same time the symbiotic between “local” and “global” in the context of globalisation that does not recognise cultural borders and has changed our perception of those spaces where human activity takes place. In fact, if we applied a criteria of proximity, we wouldn’t know for certain if what is physically closer to us, the “local”, is truly nearer than what technology so overbearingly brings by: the “global”. The term “glocal” thus encapsulates the two sides of the coin.

From the perspective of media and communication, globalisation has introduced new challenges and complexities that alter the approaches and perceptions we had a few years back. The virtual relationships that are now built at the global level, including for those locally based media outlets, bring in new forms of participation and information dissemination, thus affecting the traditional ways of analysing the public space.

Oscar Hemer

Precisely, about globalisation, culture and communication is what this important book is about: “Media & Glocal Change” edited by Oscar Hemer and Thomass Tufte, from Malmo University in Sweden and Roskilde University in Denmark, respectively. Both are members of the University Network facilitated by the Communication for Social Change Consortium since 2005.

Separated by a long bridge that links Copenhagen and Malmo, Thomas and Oscar have been united through many years of joint work and projects such as this one that has prompted them to gather in 494 pages 38 authors from Europe, Latin America, North America, Africa and Asia.

Thomas Tufte

The book is structured in three parts: the first one covers globalisation, media and culture; the second attempts to draw the map of this field of study, and the third compiles ten case studies on concrete experiences in Bolivia, Namibia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Bangladesh and several African countries.

The first part -perhaps the most innovative- analyses the paradigms and models of communication for development and social change under the light of globalisation. Chapters by Oscar and Thomas, and other colleagues such as Silvio Waisbord, Cel Cadiz, Jan Servaes, or Nancy Morris, are contributions complemented by the views of James Deane, Karin Wilkins among other authors that have participated in seminars organized by the Consortium.

This book has been in circulation in English for almost two years now. It was impeccably printed in Argentina under the seal of Nordicom and the Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales (CLACSO), and is accessible in full online.