Introduction

This research paper explores the scholarship and practice of the role of communication in development and the impact it has had on efforts to reduce poverty in developing countries. Because a significant percentage of the world's population still lives in extreme poverty (for example, 46.4% of sub-Saharan Africa, 30.4% of Southern Asia, and 10% of Latin America) (United Nations, 2004), any effort to improve the impact of development efforts is seen by many as a step in the right direction.

The terminologies and methodologies used to describe this area of work are many and varied: development communication, development support communication, participatory development communication, communication and development, information-education-communication (IEC), project support communication, social marketing, and what currently is the preferred term at the United Nations: communication for development. Many academic and development professionals would argue ad infinitum that there are distinct differences between the various terms. However, within the context applied in this paper, “development communication”, or simply devcom, refers to all of the above – to the planned use of communication in any effort to improve the lives of the poor, be it through engaging them more fully in decision-making processes, or getting them to adopt new practices that will make their lives easier, healthier and more secure.

Most discussions on the concept of development communication fit into one of two theoretical frameworks: those influenced by the diffusion theory of the American scholar Everett Rogers (Rogers, 1976, 1993); and those that argue that the diffusion model is too vertical or one-way and that the active involvement of the population in the process of communication itself will accelerate more effective and sustainable development (Servaes, 1999). These two theoretical approaches can be summarized as the Diffusion/Mechanistic model and the Participatory/Organic model.

The early paradigm of development communication advocated for the transfer (diffusion) of technological and behavioural innovations from development agencies to their clients as a panacea for addressing the inequities in developing countries. Articulated by Learner (1958), Schramm (1964), Lasswell (1964), Rogers (1962) et al., this approach was later heavily criticized by Freire (1970, 1973), Servaes (1997, 2002) and Melkote & Steeves (2001), among others, who advocate a more participatory approach that involves development beneficiaries as partners in the communication and decision-making processes.

For purposes of simplification, this paper refers to the first approach as “diffusion devcom,” and the second approach as “participatory devcom.” It also attempts to clarify and compare the two, and draw some conclusions in terms of their relevance within the framework of the multilateral approach to development assistance at the United Nations.

It should be noted at the outset that this author does not see the two as mutually exclusive, though some academics and practitioners have presented them as such. Furthermore, a review of the literature leaves one with the impression that the former camp has been more open to absorbing the ideas and concepts of the latter, than vice-versa.

The role of communication in development processes first appeared on the international stage of humanitarian assistance in the early 1960s, coinciding with the advent of the United Nations' “First Development Decade.” Research on diffusion studies flourished in the 1960s and 1970s. Development organizations like the UN Development Programme established devcom offices and hired specialists to concentrate on this discipline. In the 1970s and 1980s, academic debates spread like wild sunflowers, and alternative viewpoints blossomed.

In the 1990s, however, devcom budgets got slashed; their projects and programmes “mainstreamed” into development projects. The focus on communication, for many development organizations, shifted from the diffusion and participatory approaches to marketing and resource mobilization.

New evidence, however, may be reversing this recent trend. The UN General Assembly has issued an appeal for more attention to be given to the devcom dimension of development assistance (United Nations, 1996; see also Appendix H).

This research paper begins, as all such papers do, with a literature review. This is followed by a section that extrapolates on a few of the dominant perspectives in this area, integrating the major work of the most prolific scholars. Narrowing the view from the global and abstract to a more specific analysis, the United Nations is considered as a case study, first looking at the organization's role in development, followed by a review of what each of its agencies is doing to integrate communications into this work.

For the original research component of this project, the researcher sought to measure devcom practitioners' varying views on the state of communications in international development, especially in relation to various theoretical and historical models of development. The survey engaged more than 150 devcom practitioners.

Lastly, as with most research papers, comes the conclusion and a word on reflections for future research.