Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
Background 
Communication, specically one that is participatory, isessential in all acets o development work. Participatorycommunication can be dened as a balanced, two-way inormation sharing wherein inormation can fowhorizontally, vertically, and iteratively. The use o varioustypes o communication media enables stakeholders(i.e., government, the private sector, and civil society)to participate in the development process, and hence,allows them to infuence or contribute to the design,implementation, and monitoring o a development activity.Notwithstanding the level o participation, communicationcan contribute to increasing awareness, ostering behavioralchanges, acilitating mobilization, and establishingpartnerships in pursuit o common goals. However, the lack o it can also break down negotiations, limit alternativesto addressing problems, constrain benet distribution o development interventions, lead to marginalization o stakeholders and, ultimately, restrict the attainment o desired outcomes. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has recognizedthe important role o communication in acilitatingdevelopment work through its emphasis on participation.ADB’s rst guidelines on participation listed communicationtools as a rst mechanism or acilitating participation.Subsequently, ADB continued to ormalize the importanceo communication in its 2005 Public CommunicationsPolicy. Later in 2006, ADB’s guidance on participationdeepened the connection between communicationsand participation. For example, the 2006 guide suggestsdeveloping a communication plan with governments inprojects likely to generate a high level o public interest.ADB now denes participation in a ramework that includes(i) inormation generation and sharing, (ii) consultation,(iii) collaboration, and (iv) partnership. Depending on theextent o participation, these approaches are integrated intovarious processes during project design, implementation,monitoring, and evaluation, covering a continuum o participatory relationships between various stakeholders.
How does communication contribute to or hinderthe attainment of the desired level of participation towardrealizing project and program outcomes?
This synthesisprovides key lessons on the importance o communication inacilitating development work, as refected in the applications
Improving Project Success throughEfective Communication and Participation
May 2011
Evaluation
Independent
o participatory approaches in project preparation, design,implementation, monitoring, and evaluation in ADB operations.Lessons were drawn rom evaluation studies and completionreports o several ADB-fnanced projects and programs.
Highlights of Lessons
Information generation and sharing is an essentialcomponent of participation.
It is dened as a processwherein inormation is generated by ADB and other projectproponents and shared with stakeholders. Inormationcan also be independently generated by stakeholders andshared with project proponents, or jointly produced by both.Various types o communication channels and media (e.g.,meetings and radio broadcasting) have proved to be eectivein enhancing, acilitating, and promoting participationthrough inormation generation and sharing. For example,communicating new approaches to improve agriculturalproductivity through public awareness campaigns can
acilitate, generate, and galvanize stakeholders’ support.Lessons rom Sri Lanka’s experience in the implementation o an agriculture project have shown that public understandingo project rationale, objectives, and
expected outcomescan acilitate the introduction and acceptance o newinterventions. For example, agricultural extension activitiescomprising awareness and promotional programs, trainings,and workshops, among other initiatives, have contributed to
A  D  B P h  o t   oL  i    b r  a r   y 
Consultation (and other orms o participation) is a process through whichstakeholders infuence and share control over development initiatives, and thedecisions and resources that aect them. Shown above is an inormal consultationamong Bangladeshi women on ADB’s Health and Family Planning Services Project.
 
the improvement o arm practices and crop productivity.Similarly, the use o radio broadcast programs to gainsupport or an agriculture project in the Philippines hasbeen eective. The strong support rom listeners o radioprograms has attracted and nurtured private sectorsupport or the project completion, leading to an eectivepartnership or sustaining the project activities. Further,the public awareness campaigns or a orestry project inBangladesh had utilized audiovisual materials, and theproject hosted and conducted “annual tree airs” (i.e., stagingo theatrical programs and exhibits) that created signicantpublic awareness and appreciation or tree planting in thecoastal districts. Experiences have also shown that the lack o a communication strategy and its associated supportsystem had negative implications on project operations.For example, a water supply and sanitation project in theLao People’s Democratic Republic did not pay enoughattention to the importance o community awareness, publictraining/education programs on water treatment methods,and wastewater drainage. It was observed that even with apopulation willing to accept the water supply systems andthe proposed taris, public awareness, communication, andtraining programs should have been conducted to keep thebeneciaries well-inormed o the need or chlorination andwastewater drainage to achieve the intended benets o theproject. As a consequence, most o the wastewater drainagechannels were not developed, reportedly due to the ailureo the project to generate awareness o their importance anddemand rom the targeted communities. Having a strategy,procedures, and systems in place or communicating projectknowledge is important or ensuring project sustainability.In the case o an agriculture project in Sri Lanka, executingagencies did not have such procedures and systems in placeand, consequently, the project knowledge could not beeectively transerred to sta o government institutions.
Consultation espouses more dynamic communication.
 This involves requesting inputs rom stakeholders, whichdemonstrates a more inclusive program/project decision-making process. Consultation with stakeholder groups canbe achieved by having strategic communication between andamong stakeholders at the national, subnational, and/or locallevels. Experiences in project operations indicated diverse andvariable results rom consultations. A communication processthat is purposive and transparent acilitates consultationsthat have contributed to project acceptance, while a processwith varying degrees o intererences (i.e., actors that hinderclear reception o messages, including poor understandingo local traditions and perceptions) has led to resistance romstakeholders and, in some cases, discontinuance o projectactivities. For example, the Segara Anakan conservationand development project in Indonesia was designed inconsultation with local communities (lagoon inhabitants) andwith the involvement o local nongovernment organizations(NGOs) and universities. Their contributions were reectedin the project goals, objectives, outputs, inputs, activities,and the project
implementation arrangements. However,neighboring communities raised objections to the project,specically in the context o a river diversion component, andcultural actors played a decisive role in the communicationbreakdown between the communities (the lagooninhabitants and the opposition group), which compriseddierent ethnic and cultural groups. The inability o theproject to soten the resistance resulted in the cancellationo this integral part o the project. Public consultation shouldhave been more eective in identiying, understanding,and addressing the concerns o and objections romcommunity stakeholders. Stakeholder communicationshould have taken into account the involvement o diversecommunities and their divergent interests by elicitinginormation rom them through participatory approaches.An eective communication process would have enabledproject proponents to listen to eedback, and to respondappropriately to emergent issues, and thus in eect, wouldhave raised awareness and encouraged dialogue, identiedproblems, and mitigated risks.
 
A  D  B P h  o t   oL  i    b r  a r   y 
A acilitator elicits inormation rom the community and its people regarding anADB-nanced water supply and sanitation project in a remote town in Nepal.
Engagement of stakeholders becomes more in-depth incollaboration.
 This approach entails project proponentsand stakeholders to work together; however, stakeholdershave limited control over decision making and resources. The extent o collaborative arrangements largely dependson the scope and characteristics o the project. Projects thatentail engagements o civil society to acilitate acceptance,social mobilization, and capacity building inevitably involvecommunication processes that link stakeholders verticallyand horizontally. Each direction requires appropriatecommunication media to achieve desired results. EngagingNGOs, or instance, in acilitating beneciary consultationand stakeholder capacity building had proved to be eectivein a food control project in Indonesia. NGOs with expertisein engaging local communities ensured the smoothresettlement o aected communities in the food-proneareas. Surveys and consultations were conducted among twocategories o aected communities, namely, the communitiesthat would be resettled and the receiving communities inthe resettlement areas. Engaging a vertical and iterativecommunication process requires the deployment o variouschannels and media (i.e., including the use o questionnaires,
 
A consultation workshop is held in an agrarian reorm community in thePhilippines. Engagement o stakeholders in the consultation process is eective inachieving desired outcomes.Farmers belonging to a water users group in Indonesia conduct a meeting. Abalanced two-way communication process allows or a meaningul participationin the decision making throughout the project cycle, which can bring about adeeper sense o ownership among the beneciaries.
interviews, ocus group discussions, and in-depth community
dialogues) to aid in the development o compensationpackages and inrastructure designs, and to solicit projectsupport. These NGOs were also linked horizontally withproject implementers, working in tandem to ensureconsistency with the overall phasing and scheduling o project activities. Further, their direct coordination with theproject management unit allowed discussions on socialissues to take place with candor and openness. This reducedintererences that could lead to miscommunication in theimplementation process.in irrigation command areas. Further, the lack o publicmonitoring o the use o water-users ees let room or undmisuse by association leaders. Fee collection rate was low,creating a nancial problem that led to poor operation andmaintenance and the eventual deterioration o the irrigationsystems a ew years ater construction.Similar issues were experienced in the implementationo other water sector projects in other countries. In the caseo the small dams project in Pakistan, the project largelyconsidered engineering rather than community users’perspective in the project design. This led to difcultiesin water management and underutilization o projectacilities. The traditional engineering approach to small damand command area development negated any attentionto ownership issues, among other issues. In rural watersupply and sanitation projects, a key concern has been theoperation and maintenance o physical acilities ater projectcompletion. Again, a vital response to address this is to osterownership among the beneciaries. Various rural water supplyand sanitation projects in Indonesia and the Philippines haveindicated the need or adequate community participation inproject identication, design, implementation, monitoring,and evaluation to ensure sustainability o project benets.A balanced two-way communication process, whereinbeneciaries do not only serve as recipients o inormationbut also unction as inormation providers and managers,allows or a more meaningul participation in the decision-making process at various stages o the project lie cycle. Thistwo-way communication can bring about a deeper sense o ownership among the beneciaries.Partnerships among executing and implementingagencies have also been challenged by inadequatecommunication channels and media. A program loan inPakistan, or example, ailed to optimize the high-levelsteering committee meetings that could have been theproper orum to discuss and resolve issues in implementingpoverty reduction strategies through reorms in governancestructures, systems, and processes. This contributed to poorprogram implementation. On the other hand, regular and
    A    D    B    P    h   o   t   o    L    i    b   r   a   r   y
A  D  B P h  o t   oL  i    b r  a r   y 
Partnership allows stakeholders to participate in decision-making process and/or exert control over resources.
  This may be undertaken through ormal and/or inormalagreement to work together toward common objectives.Similar to collaboration but to a deeper extent, the degreeo participation in this approach acilitates ownership,accountability, and transparency, thereby ensuring projectsustainability, and that accrued benets are experiencedby all. The complexity associated with social mobilizationrequires a very dynamic and interactive communicationprocesses. A one-way inormation ow will not be ableto engage stakeholders who merely act as receivers o inormation. Experience in an integrated area developmentproject in the Philippines has shown that a top-downapproach o designing a project by which beneciaries aremerely inormed o the investment decisions had led to weak ownership and poor sustainability. For example, as communalirrigation systems were designed by consultants andcontractors without armers’ participation in decision makingor sharing o cash investment costs, armers consideredthese irrigation systems as part o government assets. Thearmers did not demonstrate any sense o ownership andauthority over the systems, creating a situation devoid o any responsibility among the armers to participate in andmonitor the design and construction works. As a result, manycommunal irrigation systems were overdesigned, with highinvestment costs. The lack o monitoring by beneciaries ledto construction deciencies, incompleteness, and reduction
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more