Transcript Huisstijltemplate voor `beamer`

Communication and interactive policy development
Wednesday 2nd of July
Communication and interactive policy development


General aim of this session is to discuss
communication as an instrument for agricultural
policy development
By the end of the session participants should be
able to:


understand the changing role of communication in
policy development;
apply a communication model for interactive policy
development
Instruments for policy

What policy instruments are
available?
Instruments for policy:





Legislation (like laws on import & export)
Create infrastructure (like internet facilities)
Social pressure (like environmental behaviour
which everybody is supposed to follow)
Monetary incentives (like EU subsidy in
agriculture)
Communication
Changing role of communication


In the past: Policy made by government 
Implementation Plan with communication as
a supporting instrument. Citizens are
supposed to only receive and comply.
New policy: Communication is used to
construct policy in a joined action between
government and other actors from civil
society. Citizens are having a constructive
role in problem definition and identifying
solutions
Involve the stakeholders

It is a government’s task to:



identify the main stakeholders or the representatives
thereof; and
get them involved in the analysis and design of the
agricultural trade and development strategies.
Attaining consensus among the stakeholders on
the most appropriate trade and development
strategy and creating transparency in the
agricultural sector is a precondition for success.
Instrumental thinking I


Instrumental thinking: an actor (like the
government) pre-determines a goal and the
methods to reach the goal. Example: Agricultural
research  agricultural extension  farmers.
Farmers are “end users” and just supposed to
apply the results of research, as informed by
agricultural extension agents.
Instrumental thinking II




Government supposes that only they know
how to make effective policy
“End users” are not supposed to have
relevant knowledge and innovative ideas
Government is not taking into account social
realities of “end users”
Civil society does not contribute to policy
development, only “receive” it
Instrumental thinking III



Government is in charge of Monitoring &
Evaluation (M&E)
Communication is used as part of the policy
implementation, not as part of policy
development, and focuses on information and
acceptation of proposed changes
The communication model sees the sender as
the one who sends a message through a
channel directed at a receiver
Leaving the instrumental thinking I:



Instrumental thinking: chronic problem that end
users do not accept the policy
Government stops being the regulator and starts
to be a co-actor, with other actors having
responsibilities as well
Government has the task to bring all
stakeholders of the sector together and facilitate
the process of joined policy development
Leaving the instrumental thinking II:




As a results of negotiations stakeholders agree on
rules to follow and contributions of each stakeholder
M&E is a shared responsibility and results are
assessed and evaluated together
Communication is used as part of policy
development and facilitation of the process, including
structuring of negotiation between stakeholders
The communication model sees sender and receiver
as equals, both contributing towards constructing
useful information
Changing role of communication
professionals



External: from “getting the message across” towards
creating interactive situations, like websites, public
debates, etc.
Internal: change the mindset of communication thinking
as “output of information from government to public”
towards facilitation of interaction between stakeholders
and between stakeholders and government.
Removal of hindering factors is as important in change
processes as the creation of new stimulating factors
Instruments for policy