Editorial

Information or knowledge has been described equivalent to power since as early as 1000 AD as described in Sir Francis Bacon’s “scientia potentia est” - a Latin maxim translating as ‘knowledge is power’. The concept of communication as a process of transfer of information from a source to a recipient also implies the transfer of the power that that information holds. Throughout history, it has been observed that the minority ‘with power’ has ruled over the ‘powerless’ masses through control of information not allowing their voices to be heard. This system worked cyclically as without information, the masses did not have power and since they did not have power, their need for relevant information was never heard. Nor did they have access to any platform for their voices to be heard or for accessing useful information. Without a platform, their knowledge and their aspirations remained within themselves and they remained powerless.

All concepts of communication, especially within the contexts of developmental communication, have reinforced these cycles of power. It is broadly understood and functions as a top-down process. The general understanding is that the funding agency that decides what needs to be done in the grassroots level supports various civil society organisations. There is a certain amount of behaviour change at the grassroots and sometimes those behaviours are maintained.

Since the irony of this form of development commnications was realised, there has been a renewed focus among the donor agencies and civil society organisations (CSOs), to involve communities in the very defining of their developmental goals, needs and methodologies. This form was then called participatory communication.

The major controversy around such development communication is that while it attempted to reverse the top-down approach to a bottom-up approach, the dissemination of information from those in power is restricted severely. Additionally, it was a one-dimensional approach and treated all the various communities as a single entity without identifying or catering to the uniqueness in each of the communities.

This has necessitated the need for a two-dimensional and multi-directional dialogue process to be included in the arena of development communication. As a CSO, this calls for a fresh perspective, methodology, role and skill sets within the organisation to cater to this shifting trend. The CSO requires changing its position from that of a hub of knowledge and a dissemination point to that of a listener, collection centre and a facilitator for creating platforms on which dialogues at various levels can be held. It provides access to these platforms to both masses and decision makers.

The dialogue processes at grassroots level necessitates the facilitator role of CSOs at bringing together and giving voice to various communities. This process not only identifies the issues that the communities want resolved but also provides access to a platform where mutual sharing, learning and problem solving can occur. The collection and collation of the substance of the dialogue processes are fed into the next tier of civil governance from where necessary resources or services may be provided to communities. The CSO, here too, assumes the role of a facilitator and while listening into the dialogue process, identifies and communicates leveraging opportunities and methods for social development. The processes can be repeated for several levels of governance, the ultimate goal while facilitating dialogues being to influence policy. The converse processes also are important while a CSO is involved wherein decisions at higher levels of governance or decision making are facilitated down. The eventual goal while facilitating dialogues here is to inform both need and practice at grassroots level.

While each of these independent levels of multi-stakeholder dialogues are important and need to be held in exclusion of each other, it is equally important to create a platform accessible to all levels of decision making. This is a platform for direct influence of policy and direct information of practice.

Here at Development Alternatives, we have been able to facilitate various such processes and the current issue of this newsletter is dedicated to describing each of these processes in detail.

True empowerment comes through access to information and having the power to share information in reciprocation. The role of CSOs is to provide a platform from where the voices of the people can be heard in not only deciding their development goals but also sharing the wisdom that resides within each community among communities and decision makers. q
 

 Back to Contents