The MDGs as a Communication Tool for Development

This 52-page paper examines a thesis that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), eight international agenda-setting priorities established by the United Nations (UN), are capable, as communication tools, of enhancing public dialogue about development, and this dialogue can then contribute to the achievement of the MDGs. The author suggests that the MDGs are easily communicated to all stakeholders, including marginalised groups; thus, marginalised people can participate in policy setting through participatory processes and, with the building of social agency among them, claim their entitlements, as nations begin to fulfill their responsibilities toward the MDGs.


Section one of the paper aims to distill the key features of communication for development that are applied in subsequent sections. It reviews the evolution of communication for development theory, describing the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) concept of “communication for empowerment” in which communities own the development process, fostering two-way communication about needs and participatory decision-making on what affects their lives in order to eliminate one element of poverty, the lack of voice. The author notes that information and communication technology (ICT) has the potential, when widely available, to facilitate the horizontal two-way information and communication flow that is central to a participatory development process.


Using a human rights-based perspective of identifying "rights holders" (those entitled to claim rights) and duty-bearers (those who insure rights), the paper outlines a framework for using the MDGs to build constituencies around national development agendas in which all citizens participate in the agenda setting. A model is offered for a circular framework of transparency in information generation and delivery; active participation in discussion, analysis and dialogue; and responsiveness and accountability. The MDGs enter this framework as a cycle of setting out: a national framework; communication campaigns for awareness of the national framework;dialogue among rights holders; policy setting to act on the framework; monitoring or the framework; and returning to the cycle for further framework setting. Key communication features of the cycle include: communication audits; meaningful access to development information; amplification of the voice of marginalised groups; and public debate." The document states that constraints exist in the form of weak evaluation techniques, leading to re-use of campaign formats regardless of effectiveness, and a lack of communication flow in developing countries where participatory processes are slowed by the difficulty of accessing marginalised groups.

Section two describes how communication for development was applied by the UNDP in Albania to promote the MDG agenda at the national and local level. UNDP fostered strong partnerships with elected authorities, civil society organizations, the private sector, and the media. The process brought local content into the global MDG agenda and promoted consultative and participatory policy-making practices. It aided in alignment of the MDGs with the European Union social inclusion agenda, combining development agendas in terms of similarity of purpose and in discourse that citizens could understand. The MDGs were useful in advocating for a responsive and participatory public administration to support "bottom-up" policy making, which can, as stated here, create ripple effects in civic education and foster democratic governance with participatory, transparent, and accountable mechanisms – mechanisms that can be applied to other domains of policymaking.

Section three analyses how the MDGs could help promote participatory and inclusive policymaking in Serbia, where barriers to inclusion and participation exist for refugees, internally displaced persons, Roma, and people living with disabilities. It cites the following communication barriers: the need to improve the quality of television reporting and the ethics of television reporting, the problematic use of mobile telephone networks for propaganda purposes in a former regime, and and barriers to free access to information at the state level. Widely dispersed refugees, displaced persons (IDPs), and returnees present a challenge for information dissemination, but one successful effort noted here is the broadcast of two United Nation High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) television programmes designed to provide more objective information to refugees and IDPs to facilitate their decision on solutions to their displacement.

The document reports that the Roma people, though not all marginalised, are stereotyped by the media. The Roma activists interviewed in the research advocate for their own electronic media and access to information within their communities to raise awareness of rights and entitlements, coupled with enforcement of rights protections. The document also reports on the exclusion of people with disabilities, including the denial of access to information. It calls for taking into account disability-related impediments in information systems, offering enabling provision of information, and making possible reception of feedback from all citizens in spite of disabilities. "Civil society activists are calling for sign language translation of at least a synthesis of the parliamentary debates... to enable deaf people to follow national policy debates. Similar schemes can be replicated to ensure that people with disabilities are involved in policymaking at the local level..."


In order to use the MDGs as a communication tools, the document recommends: use of language that is understandable, including data and analysis that is user-friendly; formats for people with impaired sight or hearing; and translation in minority languages. It recommends the use of mass media for MDG dissemination, building on the UNHCR lessons learned in its work with television in Serbia. It suggests increased access and use of ICT as a civil society participation tool, especially in support of marginalised populations. Also recommended is the use of mobile telephone technology, which could better serve social mobilisation if it reached vulnerable people with information generated from participatory MDG reporting and monitoring. Increased information flow from state agencies regarding the MDGs could provide information for increased public dialogue. In order to facilitate participation in the entire policy cycle, the document suggest representation as a preventative for overburdening discussion with too many voices. It recommends transparent selection of representation, giving particular attention to the voices of the vulnerable. Finally, it suggests that the use of monitoring and evaluation through surveys and focus groups has potential for increasing understanding of what vulnerable groups need from development discourse and by what mechanisms information access can improve their situations.