Towards the MDGs

In the year 2005, when countries around the world are mobilising to meet the challenge set forth by the United Nations (UN) to reach certain development targets (the Millennium Development Goals) by 2015, many development organisations and funders are keenly aware of the acronym "MDGs". In this presentation, delivered at a May 2005 lunchtime discussion at the London, UK headquarters of a networking and learning programme on health communication for development called Exchange, Warren Feek began by proposing a very different way of understanding that acronym: Media Development and Development Communication = Gains in Development Progress. In this 89-page paper from the event, Feek, who is Executive Director of The Communication Initiative, argues that stronger evidence is needed to show that communication is essential to meeting the UN's development goals, and to supporting global development aims more broadly.

Feek begins by sharing 30 or so photographs that highlight the crucial role that communication has played in a number of fairly recent, massive social movements (e.g., the United States civil rights movement, the women's movement, the ecological movement, and the anti-tobacco movement). Feek uses these images to demonstrate the centrality of communication processes and strategies in increasing awareness of rights and mobilising change through collective action.

The suggestion is that the narrative of communication's role in development is there - in plain sight; the challenge now is to "prove it". That is to say, in this MDG-focused era, the question buzzing in many funders minds is this: What real, demonstrable impact can communication have on addressing poverty and the other social ills at issue in the 8 MDGs? In short, why should we "care" about communication? Feek argues that it is up to communicators to make the case. Feek holds that communication can be measured and that the data is out there; he provides a number of examples from The Communication Initiative's MDG Impact section for each of the 8 MDGs. He then calls on communicators to both use the available evidence (by, say, looking to already-published reports in peer-reviewed academic journals) and to support increased quantity and quality of "proof" through independent studies; development and use of methodologies that pass "tough inspective for valid results"; outreach to bigger, peer-reviewed journals; attention to balance of MDG theme and media; and "serious summary pieces" that highlight what we do and do not know. He signals the strategy of collaborating on evaluation that emphasises collective analysis as one way to pool resources.

Feek speculates that perhaps the evaluation "holes" that exist in fact persist because there is a fundamental "mismatch" between the nature of the MDGs and the communication strategies being developed to try to meet them. The contrast may be described as follows: Whereas communicators often emphasise and value that which is generated by those affected, sensitive to social and behavioural dynamics, process-focused, and context-specific, the MDG vision is centrally decided, expert-shaped, universal and technical, geared toward short-term impact, and culture-neutral. Feek asks, "what does this suggest for increased emphasis/priority by the development communication community as we can ignore neither good development communication practice nor the fact that the MDGs are very much here and influential?" In response, he proposes 5 areas of action that he thinks could help redress the mismatch:

1. Identify and accelerate communication that enables people to hold governments accountable, while retaining a commitment to communicating research to other levels beyond the policy level
2. Return to basic information and use simple, culturally appropriate ways to communicate that information
3. Use technology strategically to connect people
4. Enable collective analysis and action by the people most affected by a development problem
5. Harness existing communication processes rather than seeing them as a tool to deliver a message.

Returning to Feek's alternate acrnonym for "MDG" introduced at the beginning of this presentation, one overriding message is that communication practitioners can "do the math", engaging in efforts to evaluate the impact of what they do and then using their voices to share evidence of change with those whose talk of the MDGs is pervasive, persistent, and pertinent.