"The Last Thing the World Needs is Another Website"

This summary paper outlines the interim findings from the ICD (Information and Communication for Development) Knowledge Sharing and Learning programme carried out by the Gamos-led consortium for the Department for International Development (DFID). It summarises the communication processes that are needed to engage with policy makers in order to embed effective information and communication within their development policies and practice.

The research project began with the focus of how to engage decision and policy makers in evidence that communication plays a vital role in development, but it reframed its focus to include finding effective communication processes of engagement also. Methodology of data collection included an email survey and an online invitational discussion, which together contributed responses from more than 150 policy makers, the majority being passively disengaged with a minority being academics and communication specialists in the field.

Responses from ICD specialists and academics fell within the following range: from agreeing that policy makers are unaware of the importance of communications in development to feeling that there is a growing awareness of its importance, including among donors. It was noted that awareness tends to be highest around one-way messages, such as promotional communications. However, responses from the decision makers on awareness were on the more pessimistic end of the range.

The online discussion explored the level of importance attributed to integrating information and communication into policies for delivering outcomes more effectively, and found that it has low priority, even where its importance is recognised, resulting from lack of budget, expertise, and understanding of the power of communication.

Survey respondents indicated that reliable and accessible evidence, though needed, plays a modest role in policy making, because policy processes are "messy," without direct lines between evidence and decision, and subject to a range of pressures, constraints, and political expediency. They also were sceptical about the interpretation of research data where political positions might override evidence or where institutional interests dominate policy and practice.

The summary considers the questions of what evidence is effective and how it is used in policy and notes that different types of evidence support different purposes. Respondents indicated that stories have a leading influence with policymakers, while research evidence supports decisions and gives donors data; and that impact assessment is important to new forms of aid.

Specifically looking at evidence that communications for development moves projects forward, respondents suggested that it is difficult to quantify communications "inputs" as development "outcomes," suggesting that new evaluation methods are needed to strengthen the evidence base. They were also sceptical about how research data can be interpreted where political positions might override evidence, or institutional interests dominate policy and practice. Rather than identify types of evidence that might be useful, respondents emphasised personal contact as most effective with policy and decision makers.

The project asked specifically about effective communication with policy makers, including websites and portals as tools for raising awareness, and received almost universal agreement that increasing website presence is not the best, though some respondents did associate information and communication with technology. Responses on effective communication formats parallel responses on types of evidence, indicating that different formats suit different audiences - e.g., powerful stories suit policy makers, whereas, journal papers suit academics.

Respondents indicated that networks are their most valuable source of information. The following networks were most frequently listed as sources of information:

• World Bank
• The Communication Initiative (CI)
• Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
• International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
• Overseas Development Institute (ODI)
• Association for Progressive Communications (APC)
• Online groups in general
• International Development Research Centre (IDRC)
• United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

Next step strategies, according to this research, need to emphasise these networks as entry points to discuss communication. Evidence needs to be dynamic and changing to be accessible to policymakers and to suit their needs. Websites are only one tool, and do not displace the face-to-face contact of workshops, consultations, and briefing and advocacy meetings. ICD proponents need to continue to point to the value of integrating communication in mainstream development sectors. The internet may be best utilised in building on networks and communities of interest already trusted and engaged by policy makers, optimally directing users to key material quickly, presenting it in the language of the network community, and highlighting material of key concern.

In conclusion, findings point to personal interaction and networks as being most effective for communications engaging policy makers, while new evaluation methods are needed to strengthen the evidence base on information and communication for development.