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