Hello Charles - it is great to read your comments and think about what you are saying. Do you really think we are 'dark' or simply 'realistic?" I do agree that the idea of participatory communication is widely talked about and written about today much more than the 80's - but that is the problem. In the 80's there was some room for experimentaiton. Today it is high on talk and paper and very low on action. Ideas get coopted and discussed and analysed but seldom actually implemented. I still think it is the Don Snowden's and others like him who work outside the development business (using it for support when they can) who make progress - clearly Nick Lunch is amongst that crowd.
In writing the book Ricardo and I came to understand that all that fighting within Aid Organizations for an acceptance of communication was really a fight to demand a better approach to development. Good communication became a metaphor for good development. Now I guess we are joining the growing crowds of people who are fed up with the mess of the aid business and try to figure out how to speak about it.
I think the military hope for communication as a tool in the battle for Hearts and Minds along with the assumption that donor designed development projects will change a tide is a whole new topic - hope to see you soon - its been a long time
I applaud Wendy and Ricardo's recent writings on the subject, it is somehow therapeutic to read the honesty behind their frustration.
As a practitioner of participatory video for 15 years, and as director of an organisation, Insightshare, we have faced the same walls. We have had some successes that we are proud of and developed some partnerships with development agencies that we are keen to sustain and build upon because we can see real results and benefits to communities and other stakeholders. This work tends to involve training project staff in PV, carrying out field work and supporting the creation of strategic action plans. The trickle down effect to communities can be very slow after the initial field work and training, and i worry about how much local people are getting their hands on the equipment we leave behind, and at the slow rate of visible change. I agree with Ricardo and Wendy's analysis of the aspects that block change at the grassroots.
Certainly we learned some years ago the value of individual "champions" well placed in organisations like the UN and who have personally witnessed the transformative power of the PV process and continue over the years to promote our approach.
Increasingly we are deciding to zig zag around some of the established, obvious International Development clients who have provided our bread and butter, but instead to follow our instincts and passion by working directly with communities. That is being invited by communities directly, by their home-grown NGOs or Associations or introduced by their allies, leading to capacity building process and on-going long term support based on the real needs on the ground. In turn this is leading to the creation and growth of new networks, with support from enlightened donors who trust in our methods and look for more direct and real connection with people on the ground.
Conversations with the Earth is a good example of this; an indigenous-led network connecting communities at the frontline of climate change through participatory video hubs -these are social media centres owned and run by communities like the Baka villagers of Mayos in the Eastern forests of Cameroon (www.conversationsearth.org).
Ultimately it takes courage and sacrifice and perseverance to follow strong principles in the world of business. At Insightshare nobody earns very much! Until very recently the directors (both with young families to support) couldn't rely on getting a regular salary. We rely heavily on dedicated volunteers, we are politically motivated, we are "do-ers", i guess we are activists, and cashflow is not something we focus on. Sometimes we "land" well paid consultancy work and we do the best we can working in a corporate or beaurocratic environment that sits very awkwardly with the principles of participatory communication (and can be somewhat "poisonous"). We choose this work strategically and it subsidises the work we really enjoy, with local people.
The way we are growing as an organisation reflects the situation: training local and regional networks of PV trainers, investing in a future where as practitioners we leave a smaller carbon footprint by travelling less, and enabling us to deliver training at much cheaper local cost. We always have a big vision in mind, that is about spearheading A MOVEMENT! alongside kindred spirits and diverse partners.
Nick Lunch, Director, Insight www.insightshare.org
Ricardo and Wendy repeat the hard truths learned in decades of pursuing participatory communication -- development decision-makers trained in other disciplines may pay some lip service to the idea of people-centred development, but at the end of the day they are so results-oriented that an artificial time-line pre-empts the participatory approach. Development communicators from Erskine Childers to Don Snowden knew this too, but did not give up the good fight of trying to infiltrate the development business with their more progressive ideas. At the Canadian International Development Agency, in the early '80s, a progressive manager let me hang out my shingle as Specialist, Development Communication and Wendy Quarry toiled for me to write a Policy Guideline recommending that many types of projects - social as well as infrastructure - adopt, from the start, a consultation process among the "target beneficiaries." The effort was never understood or adopted and disappeared after a few years. It is still rare, and just today we read of our Canadian Government's musing about the need to win the "hearts and minds" of the Afghan people, putting stress on "development" projects (very old style, one suspects) rather than directly battling Taliban insurgents!
I find Wendy and Ricardo's pessimism a bit dark - compared to the situation 20 years ago, participatory communication has a much higher profile - thanks to efforts such as yours - and we are surely developing a critical mass of research based on a greatly increased investment by multilateral and bilateral development agencies - UNICEF & DFID come to mind. So, keep up the good fight!
Charles Morrow
Retired Director of Public Information, World Health Organization, Geneva
& former Director of Information, CIDA, Ottawa
613 241-4665 morrow2@sympatico.ca
is it dark or realistic?
Hello Charles - it is great to read your comments and think about what you are saying. Do you really think we are 'dark' or simply 'realistic?" I do agree that the idea of participatory communication is widely talked about and written about today much more than the 80's - but that is the problem. In the 80's there was some room for experimentaiton. Today it is high on talk and paper and very low on action. Ideas get coopted and discussed and analysed but seldom actually implemented. I still think it is the Don Snowden's and others like him who work outside the development business (using it for support when they can) who make progress - clearly Nick Lunch is amongst that crowd.
In writing the book Ricardo and I came to understand that all that fighting within Aid Organizations for an acceptance of communication was really a fight to demand a better approach to development. Good communication became a metaphor for good development. Now I guess we are joining the growing crowds of people who are fed up with the mess of the aid business and try to figure out how to speak about it.
I think the military hope for communication as a tool in the battle for Hearts and Minds along with the assumption that donor designed development projects will change a tide is a whole new topic - hope to see you soon - its been a long time
Wendy Quarry
A matter of choice
I applaud Wendy and Ricardo's recent writings on the subject, it is somehow therapeutic to read the honesty behind their frustration.
As a practitioner of participatory video for 15 years, and as director of an organisation, Insightshare, we have faced the same walls. We have had some successes that we are proud of and developed some partnerships with development agencies that we are keen to sustain and build upon because we can see real results and benefits to communities and other stakeholders. This work tends to involve training project staff in PV, carrying out field work and supporting the creation of strategic action plans. The trickle down effect to communities can be very slow after the initial field work and training, and i worry about how much local people are getting their hands on the equipment we leave behind, and at the slow rate of visible change. I agree with Ricardo and Wendy's analysis of the aspects that block change at the grassroots.
Certainly we learned some years ago the value of individual "champions" well placed in organisations like the UN and who have personally witnessed the transformative power of the PV process and continue over the years to promote our approach.
Increasingly we are deciding to zig zag around some of the established, obvious International Development clients who have provided our bread and butter, but instead to follow our instincts and passion by working directly with communities. That is being invited by communities directly, by their home-grown NGOs or Associations or introduced by their allies, leading to capacity building process and on-going long term support based on the real needs on the ground. In turn this is leading to the creation and growth of new networks, with support from enlightened donors who trust in our methods and look for more direct and real connection with people on the ground.
Conversations with the Earth is a good example of this; an indigenous-led network connecting communities at the frontline of climate change through participatory video hubs -these are social media centres owned and run by communities like the Baka villagers of Mayos in the Eastern forests of Cameroon (www.conversationsearth.org).
Ultimately it takes courage and sacrifice and perseverance to follow strong principles in the world of business. At Insightshare nobody earns very much! Until very recently the directors (both with young families to support) couldn't rely on getting a regular salary. We rely heavily on dedicated volunteers, we are politically motivated, we are "do-ers", i guess we are activists, and cashflow is not something we focus on. Sometimes we "land" well paid consultancy work and we do the best we can working in a corporate or beaurocratic environment that sits very awkwardly with the principles of participatory communication (and can be somewhat "poisonous"). We choose this work strategically and it subsidises the work we really enjoy, with local people.
The way we are growing as an organisation reflects the situation: training local and regional networks of PV trainers, investing in a future where as practitioners we leave a smaller carbon footprint by travelling less, and enabling us to deliver training at much cheaper local cost. We always have a big vision in mind, that is about spearheading A MOVEMENT! alongside kindred spirits and diverse partners.
Nick Lunch, Director, Insight
www.insightshare.org
Don't Give up the good fight!
Ricardo and Wendy repeat the hard truths learned in decades of pursuing participatory communication -- development decision-makers trained in other disciplines may pay some lip service to the idea of people-centred development, but at the end of the day they are so results-oriented that an artificial time-line pre-empts the participatory approach. Development communicators from Erskine Childers to Don Snowden knew this too, but did not give up the good fight of trying to infiltrate the development business with their more progressive ideas. At the Canadian International Development Agency, in the early '80s, a progressive manager let me hang out my shingle as Specialist, Development Communication and Wendy Quarry toiled for me to write a Policy Guideline recommending that many types of projects - social as well as infrastructure - adopt, from the start, a consultation process among the "target beneficiaries." The effort was never understood or adopted and disappeared after a few years. It is still rare, and just today we read of our Canadian Government's musing about the need to win the "hearts and minds" of the Afghan people, putting stress on "development" projects (very old style, one suspects) rather than directly battling Taliban insurgents!
I find Wendy and Ricardo's pessimism a bit dark - compared to the situation 20 years ago, participatory communication has a much higher profile - thanks to efforts such as yours - and we are surely developing a critical mass of research based on a greatly increased investment by multilateral and bilateral development agencies - UNICEF & DFID come to mind. So, keep up the good fight!
Charles Morrow
Retired Director of Public Information, World Health Organization, Geneva
& former Director of Information, CIDA, Ottawa
613 241-4665
morrow2@sympatico.ca
It feels good to have people
It feels good to have people who think alike.