Asia Pacific-Aid Agenda Needs to Listen to Grassroots Women-5 Country Study on Communications

How the Aid Agenda Needs to Listen to Women on the Ground

Isis International prepared this statement for the ongoing UNCSW meeting
in New York City on Financing for Development and Aid Effectiveness.

Yes. The aid agenda includes women.

Today, the question is about matching the talk about recognising the need for
financing for gender equality with actual aid and budget allocations for
women’s empowerment by governments, international development agencies, and
donors. Within this context of limited funding for women, where the gender
budget goes to becomes even more important.

ICT4D is one area that development aid prioritised in recent years. The
influx of aid for ICT4D was aimed at advancing gender equality by financing
new information and communication technologies or new ICTs for women’s
empowerment.

The introduction of new ICTs into the gender and development framework is
based on the notion that access and effective use of these technologies will
lead to women’s empowerment and development for all. Though this ICT-centric
framework for development has been the subject of debates and discussions,
development aid fuelled many ICT-focused community projects. The focus was to
equip women and girls with the information, skills, and technology needed to
ensure their full participation in the “information society”.

But is ICT4D what grassroots women need on the ground?

Isis International together with Aalochana (India), CMDI (Thailand), Femlink
Pacific (Fiji), and Help Resources (Papua New Guinea) conducted a three-year
study to interrogate the ICT-centric development framework. With the support
of the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Isis and its country
partners examined how intermediary groups use new ICTs and traditional
communication tools for grassroots women’s empowerment in India, Philippines,
Thailand, Fiji, and Papua New Guinea. So are new ICTs perceived as more
effective and more empowering compared to traditional communication tools?

No. Empirical evidence from 5 Asia-Pacific countries shows that traditional
communication tools like radio, theatre, and film are still the most
effective and empowering tools for grassroots women.

Oral communication or direct, two-way, face-to-face interaction was clearly
the most empowering way of sharing information between intermediary groups
and grassroots women. The utility, accessibility and effectiveness of
traditional communication tools in development work for grassroots women’s
empowerment were repeatedly observed and substantiated by the 81 intermediary
groups interviewed and validated by focus group discussions with four target
communities of grassroots women. Film or video was the top communication tool
used followed by radio and popular theatre. Radio was the most accessible.
Radio, theatre, and film were consistently the most effective, along with
print media for the Pacific countries. Among the new ICTs, only the cellular
phone was effective and only for the Philippines.

New ICTs, namely the internet, computer, and the cellular phone, were
reported to be generally inaccessible, ineffective, and not empowering for
grassroots women across the 5 countries. Only the computer was being utilised
with relative frequency primarily for visual presentations when meeting with
communities face-to-face. Though intermediary groups found the internet
empowering for themselves, particularly for international, regional, and
local advocacy and networking; the internet was not empowering for the
grassroots women they served. In interacting with communities, majority
continue to rely on traditional communication tools such as street theatre,
radio, and film. As such, traditional communication tools are still the
primary vehicle for grassroots women’s empowerment in these 5 Asia-Pacific
countries. These are the modes of communication utilised by the grassroots
women themselves in their everyday realities.

So why is the aid agenda prioritising ICTs over traditional
communication tools?

The advent of new ICTs and the phenomenon referred to as the “information
society” pushed traditional communication tools as a thing of the past. The
ICT4D model privileged new ICTs over traditional communication tools.
However, the research findings clearly show that traditional communication
tools are still very much needed in the present and future. There is a need
to finance development projects using traditional communication tools
alongside new ICTs. There is a need for development funds to support street
theatre, alternative films, and community radio which are of equal or at
times greater importance to ICT projects. There is a need for financial aid
in support of face-to-face communication in empowering grassroots women and
programmes that can facilitate regular interaction with communities rather
than mediation through new ICTs.

There is a policy and practice divide in financing for gender equality. And
if aid is to empower women on the ground, it needs to start listening to
women on the ground.

Underlying the effectiveness and empowering potential of traditional
communication tools is the centrality of grassroots women in determining the
intermediary group’s choice of communication tool, and consequently choice of
communication strategy. It is the focus on grassroots women and what is
appropriate, suitable, and yes, empowering from their own perspective and
experience that leads to empowerment. Development financing for grassroots
women’s empowerment cannot be detached from what is happening on the ground.
Instead, states, international development agencies, and donors must ensure
that the aid agenda is based on women’s realities and community practices.

PC4D or People’s Communications for Development is our alternative
model. For the aid agenda to truly be empowering, it must remain rooted in
the practices of women, communities, and peoples on the ground.