The Drum Beat 163 - Communication for Social Change: Measuring the Process and Its Outcomes

This issue of Drum Beat is drawn from the recently published Rockefeller Foundation Working Paper: "Communication for Social Change: An Integrated Model for Measuring the Process and It's Outcomes" by Maria Elena Figueroa, D. Lawrence Kincaid, Manju Rani and Gary Lewis [from Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs] with a Foreword By Denise Gray-Felder.

Click here to access the paper in full on-line. To join the on-line debate on this paper - which will commence in early October please send a message to wfeek@comminit.com with a subject of "subscribe cfscindicators".

As The Drum Beat network has expressed significant interest in evaluation issues this will be the first of 2 consecutive Drum Beats on this working paper. In this issue we focus on the first half of the paper which outlines [a] the communication practice, theories, experiences and strategic thinking that informs the Evaluation process and indicators that are proposed and [b] the process indicators that are highlighted for inclusion as a component of any evaluation process. The next issue will highlight the Outcome and Impact indicators proposed. The text of this Drum Beat is excerpted from the paper quoted above and is structured in accordance with the chapters of that paper.

***

Foreword

1. While one person can "move a mountain"...a well-intentioned, well-prepared group can also "build a mountain." Such is the way I like to think of the body of work known as communication for social change. Those working in this field often move mountains, as partners with the people of local communities and villages across the globe... Click here for more.

2. ...In other words, the CFSC process is equally as important as the outcomes. The act of people coming together to decide who they are, what they want and how they will obtain what they want - the definition of communication for social change - demonstrates success, especially for poor, previously marginalised or excluded people...this model and the set of indicators are certainly not the only way to evaluate CFSC. Many other methods will emerge...of that I am certain... Click here for more.

Communication for Social Change

3. ...a consensus was reached regarding the key components of such a model: [i] Sustainability of social change is more likely if the individuals and communities most affected own the process and content of communication [ii] Communication for social change should be empowering, horizontal (versus top-down), give a voice to the previously unheard members of the community, and be biased towards local content and ownership. [iii] Communities should be the agents of their own change. [iv] Emphasis should shift from persuasion and the transmission of information from outside technical experts to dialogue, debate and negotiation on issues that resonate with members of the community. [v] Emphasis on outcomes should go beyond individual behavior to social norms, policies, culture and the supporting environment... Click here for more.

4. ...Social change is an ongoing process that can be spontaneous or purposeful. There are more sources of social change than can possibly be treated adequately in a single document. The [CFSC] Model is limited to how social change can happen through a process of community dialogue leading to collective action that affects the welfare of communities as a whole as well as their individual members.

An Integrated Model of Communication for Social Change

5. ...communication as dialogue and participation for the purpose of creating cultural identity, trust, commitment, ownership and empowerment (in today's term). The proposed model builds on this principle and a broad literature on development communication developed by practitioners, communication activists and scholars...as well as on theories of communication, dialogue and conflict resolution. Click here for more.

6. It is inappropriate to base a model of communication for social change on a linear model of communication that describes what happens when an individual source transmits a message to a receiver or group of receivers with some desired and predetermined individual effect. For social change, a model of communication is required that is cyclical and relational and leads to an outcome of mutual change rather than one-sided, individual change... Click here for more.

Communication as Dialogue

7. The communication literature also contains criticisms of the dominant, individual approach to communication theory... Early models of communication were linear, one-way processes from sources to receivers...usually for the purpose of having an effect on individual receivers. When feedback was included in these models, it was treated as "knowledge of effects"... Click here for more.

8. What would an alternative paradigm look like? At least two key features are necessary. It needs to be based on a model of communication that describes a process of dialogue, information sharing, mutual understanding and agreement, and collective action. Second, it needs a model of social change based on community dialogue and collective action that clearly specifies social outcomes as well as individual outcomes. Click here for more.

Community Dialogue & Collective Action

9. ...in which members of a community take action as a group to solve a common problem, such as high rates of diarrhea, lack of potable water and so forth, which leads not only to a reduction in the prevalence of disease within the community but also to social change that increases the collective capacity to solve new problems... Click here for more.

Catalyst

10. The model identifies 6 potential catalysts:

1. An internal stimulus [eg] noticeable increases in maternal mortality
2. A change agent [eg] initiate a discussion of "felt needs" or of a specific...problem
3. An innovation [eg] the availability of a new type of chlorine water disinfectant
4. Policies that prompt action [eg] new law that requires all children to complete primary education
5. Availability of technology [eg] mechanical digging equipment
6. Mass media

Click here for more.

Community Dialogue

11. ...Recognition of a Problem...Identification & Involvement of Leaders & Stakeholders...Clarification of Perceptions...Expression of Individual & Shared Needs...Vision of the Future...Assessment of Current Status...Setting Objectives...Options for Action...Consensus on Action...Action Plan... Click here for more.

Collective Action

12. ...Assignment of Responsibilities...Mobilisation of Organisations...Implementation...Outcomes...Participatory Evaluation...

13. External Constraints and Support refer to any factor outside the control of community members that can either inhibit or enhance dialogue and collective action. Extreme poverty, the drastic consequences of a flood or famine, or even the distance between homes in a community make it difficult to engage in a participatory process.

Outcomes

14. Changes in the frequency of participation and the proportion of community members who participate in dialogue, decision making and implementation, along with the diversity of participants in terms of education, occupation, gender, ethnicity, and so forth, provide a measure of social change of the community in terms of degree and equity of participation. Such a change is a desirable outcome of a participatory development project in and of itself, regardless of expected changes in individual health behavior and status, because such changes at the community level are expected to have a positive impact on the success of the project and on the capacity of a community to deal with its next problem. Perceived ownership, cohesion and a value for continual improvement is also expected to follow from increased participation and shared decision making. Click here for more.

PROCESS Indicators

15. In this section, we provide indicators with which to measure the PROCESS of community dialogue and collective action. In addition to specific measures for each stage, two summary matrices are provided as well, one for dialogue and one for collective action. The matrices give a "snapshot" of exactly how a particular community has acted: who and how many engaged in dialogue and participated in decisions, whether or not measurable objectives were identified, whether specific people were assigned to each task and if outside resources used. Click here for more.

16. Examples of PROCESS Indicators proposed

• Which groups and people have been involved in the recognition of the problem?
• Proportion of different interest groups or factions in the community represented in the leadership (individual or group)?
• Who was involved in the discussion of the problem and possible solutions of the problem:
• Persons from outside the community?
• Small leadership group (look for fair representation of affected members)?
• Members of the community (this is the response that indicates how equitable the participation by stakeholders is)?
• Proportion of most affected groups in the community effectively participating in discussions regarding the issue
• Proportion of relevant groups expressing their needs or interests with regard to the issue
• How are the different conflicts arising at this stage resolved (document the actual process)?
• How are (were) the goals/objectives set up (participatory goal setting, in principle, would secure wide support and action)?
• Were the affected groups involved in the identification of options?
• How is the community dealing with conflict on actions and how is conflict being resolved?
• Does a written community action plan exist (Yes/No)?
• Level of representation of interest groups on the assignment of responsibilities?
• Representation of affected groups in the community in the participating resources and organisations
• For the activities not implemented as planned, what are the reasons for poor implementation (resource constraint, decline in interest in the community members assigned with the responsibility, others)?

***

Access the paper in full on-line.

***

In the next issue - the specific OUTCOME & IMPACT indicators.

***

The Drum Beat seeks to cover the full range of communication for development activities. Inclusion of an item does not imply endorsement or support by The Partners.


Please send material for The Drum Beat to the Editor - Deborah Heimann dheimann@comminit.com


To reproduce any portion of The Drum Beat, see our policy.


To subscribe, click here.