Interview with Aida Opoku-Mensah

The Communication Initiative: What is the focus of the Panos Southern Africa?

Aida Opoku-Mensah: In terms of issues it is poverty - overwhelmingly poverty. Of course there are many issues that relate to poverty including equity, social justice, health, sexual health, HIV/AIDS and the environment. When it comes to how to address those major development concerns our focus is on making information widely available and more strongly debated. It is our belief that the more information people have and the more they are engaged in policy dialogue and on-the-ground action on the issues that most concern them, the more progress we will see on those development issues. The key to this is media pluralism - which is a major plank of our work in Southern Africa.

CI: Pluralism is one of the buzz words in any discussion of the work of Panos. What does it mean and why is it important for development progress?

AO: We are working in societies where no more than 5 years ago the information and communication systems were controlled by government and therefore the information flow was top down. There was no kind of bottom up approach or horizontal or whatever other kind of information flows. There was no or little opportunity for people to contribute their own perspective and ideas. Pluralism essentially relates to control and ownership. A pluralistic media provides a much greater chance for those perspectives to be presented. This is particularly important for countries such as the ones we are working in which are going through the transition to democracy. Pluralism enhances freedom of expression, an essential for progress on the big development issues.

CI: But what does a pluralistic communication system mean - a balance between community owned and controlled media, government owned media and commercially driven media?

AO: A system that ensures there are plural channels to access information - channels that have previously not been available. If there are not plural channels what can people do - it is very constraining. For example, on the issue of HIV/AIDS, which is a serious and difficult issue for all countries in Southern Africa, if there is one system of broadcasting and that system refuses to allow condom promotion campaigns, what do you do? And this has happened. You are very constrained in delivering your message or developing the partnerships that are essential to getting the perspectives of people marginalised in the process to the fore - to give "voice" to them.

CI: The Strategy - what did you set out to do two years ago when Panos started in Southern Africa?

AO: Well, we did not just want to write about pluralism and media diversity issues which had been the predominant PANOS approach. With the development of this Centre we wanted to place ourselves in a position where we engaged in projects that enhanced diversity and involvement. One of the key aspects of our strategy is to work with people who are marginalised and disadvantaged - and to give them a voice where they have limited or no access to information/communication channels. The first of these communication initiatives involved a partnership between the Farm Workers Action Group/FWAG, NOVIB and Panos Southern Africa on the issues facing farm workers in Zimbabwe. Panos Southern Africa supported a column in the local newspaper, The Herald, that looked at the plight of farm workers from the perspective of those workers. It is called the Farm Workers Forum. This process raised issues that receive no other coverage anywhere else in the Zimbabwean media. Those issues got on the public and policy agenda. It is an illustration of how information placed within the public domain can generate action by policy makers. The commercial farm workers made statements about their situation that demanded government response and discussion with the workers. The same was true for their bosses. They had to respond. There is now dialogue underway where previously it did not exist. We intend to move this process to a regional basis.

CI: Of course programmes such as this can still run up against the very problem that you described in the beginning - the possibility that a one dimensional and often government controlled and operated media can pick and choose what they want to appear, be heard, be seen. At a policy level how are you addressing the question of pluralism in media?

AO: For us there is a strong connection between the practical experience from initiatives such as the Farm Workers and the Development Through Radio programme, with its emphasis on rural women, and the policy debates and consequent changes. For example, within the discussion on the direction for telecommunications in countries there is not often an emphasis on rural access. The Farm workers have raised this, as have rural women. We can, with our media contacts, support them introducing those issues into the national decision making process. In the case of rural telephony we are consolidating this process through some research on rural access across the whole of Southern Africa. And there is a global link here as it is part of overall PANOS activity on rural access to telephones.

CI: Why telephone access?

AO: Because this is the most established and, in a way, the most simple form of communication between people at a distance. However by far the majority of people in Africa do not have access to a telephone. If, for example, a farmer in a rural area wanted to get information on market prices or a crop management concern, he or she would have to go into town to get it and it might be a long and costly journey. Telephones make that communication and communication for many other purposes much easier.

CI: Increasingly organisations and governments are asking questions about the impact of communication and development interventions. For Panos Southern Africa where is the data that proves or even suggests that access to communication; access to more information; engagement with communication makes a difference?

AO: There is no data, there are only indicators. Staying on the theme of telephones; the data that we have on the state of telephony in Southern Africa shows that 80% of the telephone services and connections are in urban areas. Because information is such a vital component of development our assumption is that if people in rural areas had even the most basic information connection available - the telephone - they would make more informed and more productive decisions in relation to their lives and livelihood. That was one of the reasons we have researched and written about the development of Telecenters, in support of which organisations such as IDRC have done such good work.

Uganda is one place where these Centers have been established. In doing the research on whether they were relevant to and useful for people in that country, whether they helped promote debate on important issues, we spoke with many people in rural areas. One man said to us: 'We want to learn this technology. If we get a Telecentre that would be good because it will create jobs in our area. It can help us to get information about jobs.' And another quote from a farmer: 'This center will help me to become more knowledgeable about farming practices and better methods of farming. I want better methods so I can be earn more income and send my children to school.

CI: How do Telecentres work?

AO: These are places in a telecommunication-isolated community that provide a range of connections including phones, faxes, internet and email, for the use of that community. The local community manages them and the government or donor role is to provide the hardware, back up and training. A very simple, tangible programming device but potentially very effective.

CI: Can that principle be applied to other population groups within a community in order to boost their access?

AO: The journalists communication resource center being developed by the Zambia Independent Media Association [ZIMA] is a good example of this principle being applied to specific group. There are many journalists in Zambia, some of them working for the government owned media and others working for independent media and others are freelance stringers. No matter what their situation they all lack access to modern telecommunications particularly email and the Internet. With funding support from a number of donors ZIMA is establishing a centre that any journalist can use to research and write stories and maintain contacts with other journalists. It does not cost that much but, again, should be a very valuable service.

CI: You have two major assumptions that guide your work. The first is that providing people with pluralistic access to communication - from newspaper columns by farm workers to telecenters for communities without telecommunication facilities - will lead to positive change for the most disadvantaged. The second assumption is that stimulating debate is an effective means of encouraging positive change. Why?

AO: A strong PANOS belief is that you can not find solutions for people; that you can facilitate the process by which they find solutions but you can not find those solutions for them. If you help facilitate and promote debate then you help people to access information and make their own decisions. So we say this is the situation; this is what some people think; this is what others think; here is some data; and where do we go from here? It is the opposite to message focussed communication. We encourage that process through various media channells which helps in going to scale, often a problem with participative communication strategies.

CI: Is it effective?

AO: It is effective. I can clearly recall a discussion with some women in a village. They were talking to a representative from a development agency that had been helping them with water. In the course of the conversation one of the women said to the development worker: " Oh, another thing, YOUR pump has broken, Can you please arrange for it to be fixed." I was struck by the use of the word "your". They felt no ownership so they didn't fix it. They waited for the person they perceived as owning the pump to arrive. Then it could be fixed.

Then there is the Media Support Fund, created by the Norwegian Embassy in Lusaka and Media Organisations in Zambia. They have asked Panos Southern Africa to facilitate the development and operation of the Fund. We brought a number of oganisations together to discuss how we were going to manage this Fund. The organisations we gathered together do not normally co-operate - they kind of reflect the political scene in this country. And we were bringing them together to discuss how to manage the money - over which they would soon be competing. Panos did not have the answers - but what we do know is how to stimulate debate and discussion in a positive way that promotes action. We are about to launch this fund with the organisations having agreed the trust deed, criteria, decision making processes, etc and it has been registered.

CI: From your perspective where is the communication challenge for development agencies looking to make more effective use of communication as a vehicle for development gains?

AO: Rural Communication. That is where the real democracy will take place. For most of the gains that we would like to see in the field of development, sustainable progress is dependent on people feeling that they have a stake in their societies. Then they are willing to take on the challenges in front of them. Relevant information is crucial in support of their decision making. These principles particularly apply to rural areas, which are crucial for development, no matter what the issue. They are the worst served in terms of modern communication. So, whether it is supporting a distribution, marketing and subsidy scheme for wind-up radios, community radio stations, development through radio listening clubs and rural women making radio programmes, access for farm or other workers to national media channels, or other initiatives, that is where the action should be. Generally this approach is ignored by development agencies which seem to consume much of their time, energy and financial resources on vertical messages through vertical campaigns on specific issues - such as an AIDS campaign. Those programmes do little to build involvement, capacity or sustainability.

CI: How would you characterise the difference between your approach and that of many other international development agencies?

AO: I think that many of the more innovative development agencies are trying to come up with a different approach to communication: more people driven; an accent on dialogue and debate; attention to the policy and legal framework for a new media environment; and seeking ways to engage and support the most disadvantaged groups in a society to place their views and ideas into the public arena. But, for many others, my overall criticism of the communication work of development agencies is that they do not democratise their processes. Ownership is with them. They do not give ownership to the potential beneficiaries. One of the reasons that I think I am largely right on this is - why have their not been dramatic improvements? In many cases things are just getting worse. This applies cross the board to any development issue we can think of. And the way we see this lack of democratisation is that most of the communication staff in development agencies spend their time and skills focusing on writing press releases, organising promotional events, making their own videos, polishing the organisations image and disseminating it's messages. Enormous resources are spent on their self-image. Compounding this is that overall accountability for most development agencies is back to their Headquarters and Board. For many there is little attempt to balance this with processes that demonstrate accountability to the people they are meant to be working for.

CI: Many thanks for your instructive and thought provoking comments.