Communication Common Sense

"...it is counterproductive to spend time convincing development decision makers to embrace communication. They already do...so long as it sticks to public relations, information; awareness raising; social marketing and any other form in the persuasive mode. What they do not accept, however, is the idea of participatory communication. It is messy, takes time and will definitely spoil the linear direction of the development plan..."

In this 12-page paper prepared for the International Association for Media and Communication Research (IAMCR) Section: Participatory Communication and the Politics of Development Programs, Wendy Quarry and Ricardo Ramírez advance an understanding of communication for/in development that "turns decades of communication advocacy on its head." Here, they outline their thinking on the attempt to ensure that "good" communication - that is, participatory, inclusive communication emphasising listening rather than telling - is integrated into good development. It is based on their experience as communication practitioners, which has led them to the realisation that "no matter how hard we tried – we could not effect anything close to participatory communication so long as donor agencies (or governments) were footing the bill." As the above excerpt makes clear, Quarry and Ramírez contend that it is not the case that decision-makers do not understand "good" (participatory) communication; rather, they just don't want it, because it would derail their plan. Thus, according to the authors, these decision-makers have chosen, as it were, to understand communication narrowly: as public relations and knowledge management.

Given this reality, communication practitioners must work in what Quarry and Ramírez deem "the grey zone", which is characterised by "very common and mostly unfavourable conditions. Recognizing this (the conditions)...helps us to assess reality and adjust our expectations and methodology to fit that reality. We think of this as communication common sense." They identify the following 3 complementary components to this strategy:

1. The presence of a champion, an individual (not necessarily a communicator) or organisation with a sincere respect for the views of the people with whom they work and with a belief that people innately have the ability to solve many of their own problems. Champions "are difficult to find, they cannot be replicated."
2. An understanding of context, which has to do with communities, geography, culture, and history. Context is also about the organisations, donor institutions, and corporations that shape the economy of a community. It includes government, politics, policies, and funding rules. Context also includes the media that shape how we think, perceive, and contribute or not to transform our predicament. Time matters: champions who stay in one place are immersed in the context. They are familiar with the nuances, they know the situation, they have developed trust within their environment, and they are able to act when the time is right.
3. A matching of champion and context with appropriate communication functions, which can be separated into 5 main categories: public relations and organisational communication; policy communication; educational or technology transfer; advocacy; and participation. "The types of communication that can challenge the status quo are advocacy communication and participatory communication. They contrast with those that governments and corporations tend to use: public relations, policy communication and educational communication. Both of these rely on top-down flows of information, often dependent on mass media."

Quarry and Ramírez stress how important it is to get a reading on these 3 markers before any activity takes place, or any terms of reference are set. They illustrate this navigation with examples from their practice.

Based on the above arguments and illustrations, the authors conclude that "It is not good communication that makes good development; it is good development that breeds good communication." In asking the question "So what does good development look like?", Quarry and Ramírez revisit the notion of "Another Development" proposed by the Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation of Sweden. Akin to what in the 1970s and 1980s practitioners called "People Centered Development", this model is:

• Needs-oriented - Development should be geared to meeting human needs, both material and non-material.
• Endogenous - It should stem from the heart of each society, which defines in sovereignty its values and the vision of its future.
• Self-reliant - The development of each society should rely primarily on its own strength and resources in terms of its members' energies and its natural and cultural environment.
• Ecologically sound - The resources of the biosphere must be utilised rationally in full awareness of the potential of local ecosystems as well as the global and local outer limits imposed on present and future generations.
• Based on structural transformation - Structural reforms are needed so as to realise the conditions of self-management and participation in decision-making by all those affected by it.

Quarry and Ramírez note that, although many endorsed the idea behind this model of development, "those in the positions of power in large development organizations (governments, elites) did not. Or they said they did but action never or seldom followed rhetoric. By the 1990's development had been taken over by the technocrats....We now find ourselves at workshops, meetings and training sessions or working with others on various projects where the lament is the same – the heart and soul seems to have seeped out of the development world - it has, without doubt turned into a giant business governed at a corporate level with mind numbing rules and regulations. There remains little room for creativity and innovation - in our mind a hallmark of good development. And so we turn back to the future. We advocate for Another Development and one that resonates with some of the ideas put forward in the 80's."

In conclusion, they stress that "we continue to believe that it is important to look for instances where people have been given the tools to express their needs as they see them; participate in designing plans that they feel they can handle and engage in the carrying out of these plans at their own pace. This cannot be done without participatory communication." In short, by looking at champions and context, practitioners can fit functions to the reality of the situation and can adjust their expectations and methodology so that good communication and good development - which are, they stress, one and the same - can flourish.

Editor's note: This paper, available by contacting the authors at the addresses below, lays out the central claims of a book titled "Communication for Another Development: Listening before Telling", expected to be published in August 2009 by Zed Books.