agrenpaper_127

8/3/2019 agrenpaper_127

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/agrenpaper127 1/16

Agricultural Research

& Extens ion Network

Netw or k Pap er No. 127

January 2003

ISBN 0 85003 640 2

The Agricultural Research and Extension Network i s sponsored by the UK Department for International Development (DFID)The opinions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect those of DFID.

We are happy for this material to be reproduced on a not-for-profit basis. The Network Coordinator would appreciate receiving details of any use of this material in training, research or programme design, implementation or evaluation.

Network Coordinator: Robert Tripp Administrative Editor: Alana Coyle Administrator: Fiona Drysdale

Abstract Radio is a powerful communication tool. Experience with rural radio has shown the potential for agricultural

extension to benefit from both the reach an d the relevan ce that local broadcasting can achieve by using participatory

commun ication approaches. The importance of sharing in formation locally and openin g up wider information

networks for farmers is explored with reference to the specific exam ple of vernacu lar radio program mes based on

research on soil an d water conservation. This paper describes this specific experience in the context of rural rad io

as a tool for agricultural extension an d rural development, with reference to the drama tically chan ging technology

environment that is currently in fluencing inform ation an d comm unication processes worldwide. The implications

for policy m akers of harn essing rural rad io to improve agricultural extension are also discussed.

Research findings• Rural radio can be used to improve the sharing of agricultural information by remote rural farmin g commun ities.

• Participatory communication techniques can support agricultural extension efforts especially using local

languages and rural radio to communicate directly with farmers and listeners’ groups.

• A format that combines a drama performed by local actors with corresponding thematic discussions is popular

amongst farmers listening to agricultural extension radio programmes.

• Targeted audience research can help to determin e program me content, broadcast schedu les and the preferences

of listeners regarding the mix of in formation a nd edu cation in the format.

Policy im plication s• There is a n eed for national comm un ication and m edia strategies which incorporate pluralistic approaches to

the media within the more traditional centralised broadcasting and information systems and promote the

cross-sectoral importan ce of in formation an d communication in budgetary plann ing processes such as Poverty

Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs).

• The national policy environment in many developing countries could be improved through legislation to

encourage independent community broadcasting, including streamlined licensing and subsidies for new

information services such as FM stations, in ternet providers and ru ral telecommunication services.

• Governm ents and donors shou ld invest in u p-to-date socio-linguistic an alyses of the nu mbers an d geographical

dispersal of minority languages with a view to improving information services such as government public

service information, broadcasting and research networks.

RURAL RADIO IN AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION: THE EXAMPLE OF

VERNACULAR RADIO PROGRAMMES ON SOIL AND WATERCONSERVATION IN N. GHANA

Robert Chapman, Roger Blench, Gordana Kranjac-Berisavljevic’

and A.B.T. Zakariah

Contact details

Robert Chapman is a Research Offi cer of the Overseas Development Institute, 111 Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7JD, UK.Tel : +44 (0) 20 7922 0330 Email : [email protected] Blench is a Research Associate of the ODI and independent researcher. He can be contacted at 8 Guest Road, Cambridge CB12 AL,UK. Tel : +44 (0) 1223 560687 Email : [email protected] Kranjac-Berisavljevic’ is Head of the Department of Agricul tural Mechanisation and Irrigation Technology, Faculty of Agricul ture,University for Development Studies, 1882 Tamale, GHANA. Email : gordanak@africaonli ne.com.ghA.B.T. Zakariah is Communication O fficer, Central Administration, Uni versity of Development Studies, P.O. Box TL 1350 Tamale, GHANA.



iii

Rural radio in agricultural extension…

CONTENTSPage

Abstract i

Contact details i

Acronyms iv

1 INTRODUCTION 1

2 APPROACHES TO RURAL RADIO 1Experiment or established tool?

Participatory communication and CATS

Community participation and empowerment

Radio and extension in the wider development context

Use in agricultural extension

Partnerships and networks

3 GHANA CASE STUDY 6Creating awareness of soil and water conservation issues via FM radio: experiences

from northern Ghana

Programme design

Audience research methods

Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the farmers surveyed

Farmers’ reactions to the radio programme

Final evaluation results: situation at the end of the growing season

Conclusions

4 IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT 10Policy issues

5 CONCLUSIONS 11

REFERENCES 11

ENDNOTES 12

Tables and figures

Table 1 Estimated number of radio sets in use in Africa (1955–95) 2

Table 2 Target audience’s understanding of radio programme 9Table 3 Aspects of the programme most enjoyed by farmers 9

Table 4 Perceived main messages of the programme 9

Table 5 Whether we practise SWC techniques or not, farming will always continue 9

Table 6 There is no point in wasting time on soil and water conservation 9

Figure 1 Radio and population growth in Africa 2

Box 1 Gender-differentiated programming 5

Box 2 Programme content and farming cycle 6

Box 3 Programme messages 7



Agricultural Research and Extension Network Paper No. 127

iv

Acronyms

ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency

AMARC The World Association of Community Broadcasters

CIERRO Centre interafricain d’études en radio rurale de Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)

CATS Community Audio Tower System

CMDC Compagnie m alienn e de developpemen t des textiles

DAB Digital audio broadcasting

DCFRN The Developing Countries Farm Radio Network

DFID Department for In ternational Development (UK)

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

GBC Ghana Broadcasting Corp oration

ICT Information communication technology

IDRC International Development Research Centre (Canada)

ISNAR International Service for National Agricultural Research

MoFA Ministry of Food and Agriculture (Ghana)

NGO Non-Governmental OrganisationO DI Overseas Develop men t In stitu te (UK)

PRSPS Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers

RST Radio Savanna Tamale

SEC Strategic Extension Campaign

SWC Soil and water conservation

UDS Unive rsity of Deve lopment Studie s (Ghana)

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

URA Upper Region Radio



1 INTRODUCTIONThe terms rural radio and community radio h ave cometo be used interchangeably to describe FM stationsestablished to broadcast to a local and p redominantlyrural audience. The growth of rural radio stations overthe past few decades reflects both the improvementsin informat ion technologies and the shif t ingdevelopment paradigm towards a more participatorystyle of information and knowledge transfer. The‘commu nity’ aspect of local rad io initiatives combinesa number of approaches. The most obvious is that alocal radio station gives the community a voice, andby encou raging the active participation of the audience

in the making and scheduling of programmes this voicecan play an empowering and potentially unitingfunction. The community focus can also serve anotherfunction: by employing members of the communityboth as station staff, such as radio presenters,correspondents and programme fac i l i ta tors oranimateurs, and as intellectual resources, for exampleproviding programme material and content. This notonly reinforces the participatory nature of thedevelopment approach but ensures local ownershipand a greater chance of sustainability. Therefore,although the terms rural and community are usedinterchangeably it is the community element which

has been a de liberate focus of many initiatives to ensurethat the stations are run not only for the communitybu t by the community. Rural radio has other elements:a development focus and an elevated cost per listenercompared with urban stations which often makesubsidy inevitable. Advertising, as opposed to publicservice announcements, is often uneconomic. Ruralradio is the focus of th is paper because thepredominantly agricultural audiences of these stationscan benefit from information to improve theirlivelihoods.

There are several approaches to using radio fordevelopment, and Section 2 outlines some of those

being used to harness radio for agricultural extension.Radio initiatives as part of broader communication fordevelopment strategies have been used b y internationalorganisations such as the United Nations Children’sFund (UNICEF), the United Nations EducationalScientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and theFood and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the UnitedNations since the late 1960s. Other media such as video,television, the internet and information commu nicationtechnologies (ICTs)1 are also the focus of an increasingnumber o f in te rna t iona l o rgan i sa t ions , non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and governmentsinves t iga t ing the ro le of communica t ion in

development. The impetus of the current revolutionin information technologies has led to a more acuterecognition that, without a concerted effort to ensuregreater information equity, current information

asymmetries could be accentuated. On a global scale,this debate is manifested in the discussion of ‘digitalopportunities’ or ‘digital divides’ (according to optimisticor pessimistic views). Although the focus of this paperis on the agricultural content of rural radio programmes,some involvement in the digital debate is unavoidable.A satellite d igital radio network, Worldspace , is alreadybroadcasting over much of Asia and Africa and couldreach farmers in any locality if they had the necessaryreceiver; cost is presently the only barrier. Of moreimmediate relevance is the increasing flexibility andinterconnectivity of digital information technologies.

Well-established community radio stations are startingto harness ICTs, e.g. Kothmale in Sri Lanka, set up in1989, which was connected to the internet in 1998with fund ing from UNESCO. In discussing app roachesto rural radio, therefore, this backdrop of the ‘digitalinformation revolution’ will also be addressed inSection 2, to exp lore the curren t context of agriculturalextension radio programmes and anticipate theimplications for future strategies. Section 3 discussesthe specific case of six vernacular radio programmesin Northern Ghana to examine how content and trainingmaterial for agricultural development can evolve. Thelessons learned from this experience will then be

considered in the context of wider experiences withrural radio and the challenges facing agriculturalextension in many developing countries.

2 APPROACHES TO RURAL RADIORural radio is a well understood term. It is relatively

jargon-free and self-explanatory but its meaning haschanged over time. ‘In 1985 the term rural radio usuallyreferred to a division within the national broadcasterthat produced programmes in the capital and broadcastthem to the countryside. Now rural radio is local radio’(Girard, 2001: 6). At the most fundamental level it isunderstood to be a coherent sub-division of radio

communication. More specifically it is a geo graphicallydescriptive term which acts as a powerful metaphorfor the developmental process of connecting peopletogether across remote communities so that they canshare their knowledge, information and culture. Ruralradio is generally perceived as a force for good,providing both education and entertainment wherethese might otherwise not exist. However, it is also anunusual term in that no o ther communication mediumis spatially differentiated in this way. In this sense, itleads to a presumption of isolation, of informationpoverty and a lack of coordination which provides araison d’être for a radio intervention. Most rural radio

stations have been established by internationalagencies , NGOs or governments expressly fordevelopment purposes and it is therefore inherently asupplement where other delivery systems are seen to

RURAL RADIO IN AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION: THE EXAMPLE OF VERNACULARRADIO PROGRAMMES ON SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION IN N. GHANA

Robert Chapman, Roger Blench, Gordana Kranjac-Berisavljevic’ and A.B.T. Zakariah



Agricultural Research an d Exten sion Network Paper No. 127

2

be failing. The particular experience of agriculturalextension systems in many developing countries hasled to a review of the approach and a shift to a moreadvisory and facilitation-based approach (Roling, 1995).The corresponding shift towards more participatorydevelopment approaches (Chambers, 1994; Brown et

al., 2002) has meant that a greater understanding of community perspectives is required to identify the localresources that can be built on to address local priorities.Similarly, efforts to improve agricultural extension havefocused on innovations in communication to improvethe points of interaction between research, extensionand farmer to encourage a greater sharing of information. This is intended to replace the top-down,one-way technology t ransfer approach widelyperceived to have failed to improve the prospects of most farmers and their rural commun ities. This sectionidentifies the way that agricultural extension and ruralradio have come together to tackle common community

development goals.

Exp erimen t or established too l?Experiments with radio as a communication tool havebeen going on since the 1940s. According to Mytton(2000), Harry Franklin pioneered broadcasting inindigenous African languages as early as 1941 inNorthern Rhodesia to p rovide n ews of the war to thosewhose families were fighting in Somaliland as part of the Northern Rhodesia regiment. The p roblem he facedwas getting receivers into villages because the wirelesssets were not p ortable and required mains electricity.He managed to persuade Ever Ready to manufacture

the ‘saucepan special’ battery set that could be used topo wer a small low-cost radio that required less electric

power than conventional sets. This proved verysuccessful prior to the introduction of the transistorradio about a decade later. The use of radios acrossAfrica has grown to over a 100 million by someestimates. Table 1 shows the growth in the nu mber o f radio sets compared with population growth over the

same period. Although the ratio of people to radiosremains quite low they have a big impact because somany sets are shared and p eop le listening in group s iscommon. However, Figure 1 illustrates the regionaldisparities in Africa; and further national and sub-nationalvariations in radio penetration and use could be identifiedespecially between many rural and urban areas.

As radio technology has developed over the pasthalf-century or so it has been ad opted widely in manydevelop ing cou ntries, not just in Africa. Radio stationsare run by organisations ranging from the governmentto private commercial enterprises, NGOs and religiousorganisations. Experiments with rural radio by the FAO

began in the late 1960s and by 1969 a DevelopmentSupport Communication branch had b een establishedwithin the Information Division to assist with its fieldactivities (Coldevin, 2000). The FAO-funded rural radiostations that broadcast in local languages were initiallymanaged centrally like those state radios run from urbancapitals such as Ouagadougou and Bamako (Querre,1992) and developed in the ’90s into more participatorycommunity-based radio stations (Ilboudo , 2000; Fardonand Furniss, 2000). One such community approachwas to use ‘narrowcasting’ technology based on acommunity audio tower system (CATS), which usedkaraoke equ ipment and an amp lifier with microphones

in a studio linked to a metallic tower with all-weatherloudspeakers.

Source : Mytton, 2000

Figure 1 Radio sets in Africa

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

1955 1965 1975 1985 1995

Years

R a d i o

s e t s ( 1 0 0 0 s Radios in N Africa

Radios in Sub-Saharan

Africa (excluding South

Africa)

Radios (South Africa)

Source : Mytton (2000), FAOSTAT, (1998)* (1000s) (excluding South Africa)

Table 1 Radio sets and population in Africa, 1955–95

Years 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995Radios in Africa* 1865 11,900 32,600 72,000 111,560Population * 230,871 293,295 380,238 506,234 663,454Ratio of radiosto people 1:124 1:25 1:12 1:7 1:5




3

Participatory communication and CATSCATS were installed in the Philippines in the late 1980sand early 1990s by FAO, the United NationsDevelopment Programme (UNDP), UNICEF and theDepartment of Agriculture. The CATS in Tacunan, asmall barangay in Mindinao, started in 1992 and can

‘narrowcast’ over a three-mile radius using a team of local volunteer presenters who form the CommunityMedia Council (CMC). The Council meets to discusscommunity issues and the programme schedu le whichis now well established, with health issues on a Mondayand farming on a Tuesday, for example . Theprogrammes, such as Agrikulturang Pangmasa

(People’s Agriculture), are presented in the eveningbetween six and seven. Specific agricultural problemsaffecting the community have been successfully tackled,such as control of banana pests and the problem of the rhinoceros beetle which affects coconut trees(Dagron, 2001).

The CATS have also been used in FAO’s multi-mediacampaigns such as the four-month ‘School of the Air’aimed at improving rice production. This campaignused three half-hour presentations a week over a four-month period to provide farmers with information ona range of issues relating to local rice production,including integrated pest management techniques. Theprogrammes were followed up in the community witht ra in ing us ing pr in ted mater ia ls and f ie lddemonstrations. A before and after evaluation of theimpact of the campaign was carried out, based on b oththe r ice farmers’ knowledge and the i r use of recommended practices. Amongst the farmers surveyed

their knowledge had increased from 55% to 92% andtheir use of recommended practices from 46% to 68%respectively (Coldevin, 2000). The cost of a CATS isestimated at US$2000 for the equipment, the studiobeing provided by the community (Coldevin, 2000).The communities where CATs were installed in thePhilippines averaged around 4000 inhabitants all of whom could be reached by the loudspeakers .Experiments have also been carried out in ruralcommunities in Ethiopia, Thailand and Mozambiqueand have served as ca ta lys ts for communitymobilisation. This narrowcasting approach is inherentlyinclusive with no problems about the cost of radio

receivers or their batteries to worry about. In lessdensely pop ulated rural areas such as in many p arts of Africa the increased reach of a radio transmitter isneeded but the principles of local ownership andcontrol have been well established by CATS. In thecase of Maragusan, benefiting from the CATS experienceof Tacunan, the transition has been made from a CATSto a fully fledged local radio station and although ‘atransmitter makes a difference technology wise… thecontents and operational framework remain the same’(Dagron, 2001).

This experience is therefore more than simply anexperiment with narrowcasting technologies and hashelped to develop the participatory communicationapproaches that have been adopted by many rural radiostations. An interesting variation of the approach isthe village information centre established in the coastal

village of Veerampattinam in Southern Ind ia whichprovides weather bulletins to the fishermen vialoudspeakers. The information centre has beenequipped with two pe rsonal computers linked to emailvia a spread spectrum mast installed alongside theloudspeakers. An information centre in the nearby town

of Vilanur collects information on a range of local issuesand regularly updates the village information centreby email, for example, with information on marketprices and government schemes. The villagers, inaddition to receiving the information announcedthrough the loudspeakers, are also able to make specificrequests at the centre which are then sent to the central‘hub ’ in Vilanur, staffed by personnel trained to searchthe internet and maintain databases of local information(Chapman and Slaymaker, 2002). The ‘hub’ and outlyingvillage centres have been established with the help of alocal NGO, the M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation,and support from the Canadian International Donor

Agency (IDRC). The FAO is now also investigating thepossibility of connecting the network of rural radiostations, such as those established during the 1990s inAfrica, to the internet. To many people it is the localfocus and participatory communication app roach of ruralradio that has the greatest potential to harness theinternet and other information communicationtechnologies and provide the information intermediarynecessary to bridge the ‘rural digital divide’ (Richardson,1997; Ilboudo, 2001; Heeks, 1999).

Com mun ity participation andempowermentThe strength of rural radio as an extension tool is widelyregarded to lie in its ability to reach illiterate farmersand provide them with information relating to allaspects of agricultural production in a language theyunderstand. This does not mean simply readingtechnical information over the airwaves in locallanguages, but understanding the way farmersthemselves discuss their problems in the communityand providing relevant information in the local agro-ecological and cultural context. Extension services havebeen criticised both for failing to reach the majority of fa rmers in many developing countr ies and tocommunicate successfully with those that fall within

range. Rural radio offers both the reach and therelevance to its listeners when the programmes aregenerated in a community-based and participatoryfashion. ‘More than any other mass communicationmedium, radio speaks in the language and with theaccent of its community’ (Girard, 2001: 6). It is easy tounderstand the appeal to listeners of having local issuesdiscussed in the ‘accent’ of the local community. Thechallenge for international organisations such as FAOhas been to use rural radio as an extension tool whichcan take technical information from the wideragricultural research community and translate it bothliterally and figuratively into the local language withthe most appropriate ‘accent’ for the target audience.This requires a shift away from simply deliveringextens ion ‘messages’ and a move towardsunderstanding the local farmers and their knowledge




4

of the subject in question (FAO/CTA, 2001). Theexperience of four rural radio stations set up inKolondieba, Bougouni, Koutiala, and Bla in SouthernMali in 1999 with technical assistance from FAO foundthat listeners’ groups were very helpful. The cottonfarmers, in particular, formed groups in order to coordinate

their production for the parastatal Compagnie maliennede developpement des textiles (CMDT) which was a partnerin establishing the radio stations.

The radio stations already established in Mali arepart of a wider project of community empowermentinvolving the establishment of over 40 community radiostations between 1995 and 2014. This is part of thegovernment’s plans to promote democracy anddecentralisation and encourage the formation of community groups such as farmers’ organisations.Participation in constructing and financing the stationshas been fundamental to their establishment, and thestaff and programming committee have all been

selected locally by the community. Training in runningand managing the stations has been given by the Centre

interafricain d’études en radio rurale de Ouagadougou

(CIERRO). The FAO is providing ongoing training inhow to monitor and evaluate the impact of theprogrammes ‘to determine who is listening to whatprogrammes, whether they change their farmingpractices as a result and what, if any, impact this hason farming, livestock rearing, health and naturalresources’ (Mundy and Sultan, 2001).

Radio and ex tension in the widerdevelopment context

Radio stations set up in rural areas have a predominantlyagricultural clientele. Whether those who run them arepursuing the development objectives of the station’sfunder or simply aiming to entertain, they are awarethat agricultural issues are very high on their listeners’priorities. However, agricultural extension systems haveonly shifted to more participatory approaches relativelyrecently and so much of their early efforts used thetop-down technical scientific information approachwhich tended to ignore the diversity of both localagricultural problems and the farmers’ existingknowledge and skills. Other social development sectors,such as health and education, have been more effective,

using rural radio to communicate messages to a targetcommunity or a specific demographic group. In manyareas radio stations have become highly valued forinteracting with specific disadvantaged groups and forhandling complex social problems. Youth radio, forexample, has emerged as a powerful tool forin terna t ional organisa t ions promoting the UNConvention on the Rights of the Child, encouragingchildren to p articipate in and produce programmes onissues that are important to them. The Hatemolo RadioProgramme in Nepal encourages disabled children toshare their experiences and produce radio p rogrammesabou t them to encou rage others. The children arrange

the programme schedule, develop ideas and scripts, andproduce the shows (Communication Initiative, 2002).

The Soul City project in South Africa is probablyone of the best known multi-media approaches to

tackling complex social development problems suchas violence against women , HIV/ AIDS and other healthissues. Central to Soul City is a television programmecombining education on HIV with an en tertaining soap-opera-style format. The educational messages are thenfollowed up through a series of radio discussion

programmes called Healing Hearts which are broadcastin nine languages on regional radio stations. The storiesare serialised in ten newspapers in two languages, and2.25 million booklets are distributed in nationalnewspapers and to community-based projects. Thecharacters from the TV show are also used in a rangeof different formats from school books to comics andadult information materials (Dagron , 2001). This multi-media approach is based around a process of ‘edutainment’ which aims to encourage public debateabout health issues rather than simply dictate messages.It is useful, therefore, to consider the use of radio asan extension tool for agricultural development in this

context of wider social development concerns. Thereis however a political dimension that should beexplored, although by necessity only briefly here,before considering the use of radio in agriculturalextension more specifically.

Rural radio in many countries has been promotedas part of a broader process of democratisation. Thedevelopment of decentralised and p luralistic media alsocorresponded to many of the objectives of the WorldBank’s structural adjustment policies aimed at reducingstate monopolies and encouraging privatisation. Theprocess of achieving radio pluralism, however, has notalways been smooth. In Burkina Faso, rural radio

stations established in the ’70s and ’80s with Germanfunding broadcast in 17 recognised indigenouslanguages (langues n ationales). However, with thepolitical coup and the end of funding, the stationsbecame unsustainable. The FAO continued to providetechnical assistance during the 1990s but the politicalcontext meant that the rural radio stations remainedconstrained by their links to the state radio and limitedstatutory authority. More recently, the Ministry of Communication and Culture has attempted to p rovidea comprehensive regulatory framework to enable theprivate, rural and state radio stations to coexist(Nombré, 2000). Similarly, in Benin, the p roblems with

establishing five community FM radio stations (radiorurale locale) in Lalo, Ouèssè, Banikoara, Ouakè andTanguiéta were more political than financial. Very basicequipment was used consisting of a small studio,transmitters and solar panels with batteries thatcontributed to a very low cost of installation. Thestations were intended to broadcast on FM with a rangeof up to 100km in two languages each to cover largerural areas where there is considerable linguisticdiversity. However, problems arose, for example inTanguiéta as the choice of languages, staffing of thestation and e ven its location all became po litical issues(Grätz, 2000). Effective legislation enshrining the

decentralisation o f political autho rity and liberalisationof the media needs to correspond with a communitymanagement structure that avoids local radio stationsbeing con strained by local political disputes rather than




5

fulfilling their intended role as agents of democraticchange. In many countries, such as India, rural radiostations are not p ermitted to broadcast independen tlyof the state broadcasting authorities.

Use in agricultural extension

The FAO develop ed the Strategic Extension Campaign(SEC) methodology in many countries of Africa, Asiaand Latin America in order to support the localextension agents in their work whilst also harnessingthe multimedia tools available to encourage greatercommunity participation. Various media were employedincluding local radio, posters, local theatre, audio-cassettes, comics and silk-screened printed materials.The radio slots were used strategically to advertise thekey messages of the campaign and target particularlisteners’ groups. For example, the campaign inMalaysia, in collaboration with the FAO’s Inter-CountryProgramme on Integrated Pest Management in Rice in

South and South-East Asia focused on rat con trol. Basedon a survey of the extent of the problem and focusgroup d iscussions on approaches being used to tacklethe p roblem the campaign began in 1985 with a seriesof training workshops for the core group responsiblefor the management of the SEC. The multimediamaterials were then designed and tested w ith specificstrategies and channels of delivery chosen to have themaximum impact. The radio in this case was used todiscourage the use of a particular poison, zincphosphide, in preference to a safer wax and dustpoison, easier to use and more effective. This wasfollowed up with a portable flip chart and booklets

used by trainers for physical control methods and groupdiscussion, including religious leaders’ sermons. Afollow-up evaluation in 1987 showed that the numberof farmers using zinc phosphide fell from 92% to 40%and the n umber of farmers reporting total damage fromrats fell from 47% to 28%. The use of the alternativepoison dust and baits recommended by the campaignrose from 14% to 58% and 31% to 94% respectively.Although successful, the campaign was expensive atover $140,000 (approximately $1000 per person) withover 50% being spent on multi-media materials andthe rest on training field personnel which involved 34people in five workshops for a total of 32 working

days (Adhikarya, 1994). This compares to the currentperception that rural radio can function as a low-costeducational tool. The World Health Organization(WHO) es t imated tha t HIV/AIDS educat ionalprogrammes in developing countries carried outthrough mass media such as television and radio rangedin cost from only 0.041 to 0.07 US cents per person(Bouhafa, 1997 in Myers, 2000).

Simli or ‘friendship’ radio operating in NorthernGhana was established with assistance from the DanishCommunity Development Programme. The radiobroadcasts in Dagbani and Gonja have a range of approximately 60km including West Gonja, Tamale,

Savelugu/Nantong and parts of West Mamprusi andGushiegu/ Karaga districts in the Northe rn Region. Thestation p rovides a mix of entertainment – music, dramaand news – and discussion programmes on local issues

aimed at tackling community development problems.Its educational and extension role is well establishedthrough the development of local schools where theteachers are trained to integrate specialist broadcastsinto the curriculum. Teachers also use recordedcassettes of programmes for special classes to

encourage the local adult population, including farmers,to improve skills such as basic literacy. Agriculturalextension programmes are prepared by trainedcommunity radio agricultural extension officers. Theirrole is to visit farmers in the community, discuss theirproblems and priorities, then prepare a series of discussions with local experts, a drama or a combinationof techniques including interviews with farmers in thefield. The programmes are felt to be far more accessibleto local farmers if they can hear themselves or theirneighbours discussing the issues directly on the radio.Norrish (1998) has observed that, ‘it is no longerconsidered good enough for media professionals to

isolate themselves from the audiences they aresupp osed to serve.’ In order to achieve a level of farmerparticipation the rad io extension officers have to spendat least 12 days a month recording out in the villages,spending the rest of the time editing in the studio withthe p roducer, tracking down specialists from the d istrictoffices of the Ministry of Agriculture, regionaluniversities and local NGOs, and researching theprogramme topics.

The rural radio stations Radio Mampita and RadioMagneva in Madagascar are credited locally with theintroduction of new agricultural techniques. Localassociations were encouraged to become members of

the Conseil d’admin istration in order to participate inthe running and funding of the stations. Although thegovernment issued the FM licences for free the stationsare only partially funded by donors and commercialadvertising revenues. Members from the community-based peasant associations were expected to pay Francs

Malgaches (Fmg)50,000 (US$8) or 60kg of rice per yearto join the Conseil d’administration with individualspaying Fmg5,000 for a one minute message but half

Box1 Gender-differentiated programming

Farming programmes do tend to be relevant to a broad swathe of

the community including both men and women. In manycommunities, however, there is a clear division of labour, withwell defined roles for men and women in terms of the crops theygrow and the activi ties they are responsible for. In ri ce productionin Ghana, for instance, women are predominantly involved in theharvesting, winnowing, manual de-stoning, parboiling andmarketing. Men are predominantly responsible for the landpreparation, sowing, water management and weeding; and thehousehold may join together for certain tasks such as threshingand transport. Radio extension programmes, therefore, need to beprepared and broadcast in a way that makes them accessible tothe target audience. This will require consultation with thecommunity to identify not only the di fferent subject priorities ofmen and women but also the timing of the broadcasts includingany meetings of listeners’ groups or follow-up training, to fit inwith work and household schedules. Radio Peace in Southern

Ghana broadcasts to the women’s cooperative on issues such asfish processing and marketing but on Tuesdays, for example,programmes are targeted at the fishermen who stay ashore in Elminaport to repair their nets.




6

that if they were members of an association that had joined. This cost recovery mechanism has not provedvery successful but the agricultural programmesbroadcast mainly in the evenings are po pular. The locallanguage issue is also not so much of a problem inMadagascar as elsewhere in Africa because the majority

of the population understands a single nationallanguage , Malagasy. The monitoring of local livestock thefts has also resulted in a dramatic increase in thenumber of livestock recovered (Dagron, 2001). Ruralradio has also been credited with preventing conflictbetween farmers and p astoralists in Mali where farmershave been ab le to inform the local radio station whe ntheir fields will be harvested and become free forbrowsing by migrating herds of cattle (Myers, 2000).

Partnerships and n etworksOne of the difficulties of operating a schedule of agricultural extension programmes on rural radio is

accessing agricultural research material to support therange of topics requested by farmers. The InternationalService for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) aimsto improve the linkages between agricultural researchand rural radio in Ghana, Mali, Uganda and Cameroonin a collaborative pro ject with the University of Guelphand FAO. The Developing Countries Farm RadioNetwork (DCFRN), a Canadian NGO, is also a partnerin the p ro jec t wh ich he lps communi ty rad iobroadcasters to share their experiences and providestraining in scriptwriting. Agricultural researchers andradio broadcasters are being brought together toimprove the planning, preparation, format and

evaluation of their extension programmes. Thecollaboration between a wide range of partnersinvolved in farm radio broadcasting is intended to bea capacity-building exercise which will provide thestations with additional tools to improve the impact of their programmes (Hambly Odame and Kassam, 2002).The FAO is also collaborating with the WorldAssociation of Community Broadcasters (AMARC) todevelop training programmes for community radiobroadcasters (Ilboudo, 2001).

A further benefit of networking is the ability to shareprogramme material and ideas. The international NGO,PANOS, maintains a database of radio programme

materials obtainable on cassette or via the internet forcommunity radio stations to use directly or translateand assimilate into local programmes. UNESCO andDanida helped to set up small networks such as theTambuli network of 20 community radio stations inthe Philippines in the 1990s. Providing communicationbetween remote stations and wider networks is oftenthe greatest challenge (Dagron, 2001). Mytton (2000)points towards the future of satellite-based networksand the potential of digital audio broadcasting (DAB)which is already a reality in many developing coun tries.Apart from reaching the many rural areas that are notserved by rural radio due to the lack of a terrestrial FM

network, satellite-delivered digital radio can be usedbe used to provide large quantities of programmematerial to existing stations relatively cheaply. The useof the internet as a n etworking tool is being tested by

the FAO bo th for rural radio and for exten sion servicesmore generally such as through the Farmnet and Verconconcepts (FAO, 2000a,b). The considerable store of information available on the internet and the speed atwhich information can be shared between networksof people and institutions offers the potential to rapidly

increase the availability of information on intern ationalagricultural research and community developmentexperience in many developing countries. Manydeveloping countries also have a considerable amountof public information that could be made moreaccessible nationally using the internet. To benefit fromthis potential effort needs to be focused on improvingthe user interface, adapting ICTs to provide low-costapplications that suit the local physical (geography,climate and infrastructure) and cultural conditions.Many of the lessons of harnessing rural radio throughmore participatory communication approaches couldalso be applied to the presentation of information

through the internet. Contrary to some expectationsthe in te rne t has no t unde rmined rad io a s acommunication medium but in some ways offers realopportunities for enhancing the role that existingcommunity radio stations play as the local voice of adecentralised peop le-centred communication n etwork.In the meantime, ‘in most of the wo rld radio is still themedium of choice and offers the greatest potential forserving farm and rural populations’ (Hilliard, 2001).

3 GHANA CASE STUDYA long-term research programme, ‘Resource degradationin sub-Saharan Africa: policies to support sustainable soil

fertility management and soil and water conservationamong resource-poor farmers in semi-arid areas’, wascompleted in 2000 with the p ublication of three volumes,two in English and one in French (Blench and Slaymaker,2001a,b,c). This was a collaborative project betweensix African countries2 and the Overseas DevelopmentInstitute (ODI) UK, funded by the Department forInternational Development (DFID). The wrap-upworkshop on soil and water conservation (SWC)techniques was organised by the University forDevelopment Studies (UDS), Tamale, as one of the partnerinstitutions. As a consequence, there was considerablediscussion about the best method of disseminating the

findings of the study to farmers, given the problems of the extension services in the partner countries.

Box 2 Programme content and the farming cycle

The experience of agricul tural extension at Siml i Radio has shownthat the most popular programmes are those that can providefarmers with a direct income-earning opportunity. This frequentlyinvolves discussion and training on topics that help to combinegrowing traditional crops with a supplementary activity that doesnot require high levels of investment or risk in terms of ceasingexisting activi ties. Specific examples of popular programmes havebeen on bee-keeping, rearing grass-cutters and giant snailproduction especially for sale to customers in the south of thecountry. These additional extension programmes are most popular

during the dry season when farmers have the time to consideralternative strategies. During the cropping season specific adviceis preferred on the full range of crops being grown locally, timed tocoincide with the various stages of land preparation, planting,weeding, water management, harvesting and marketing.




7

Despite the breadth of experience with rural radiomentioned above, few African countries haveexpe rimented with transmission in minority languages;usually the national language or the dominant regionallanguage is used or else minority language broadcasts(on AM) are simply translations of centrally-approved

government broadcasts, as in Nigeria. For this reason,messages often do not reach the very audience theyare intended to influence (Ansu-Kyeremeh, 1992).However, Ghana has taken the innovative step of settingup FM stations for minority communities in the North,communities that are excluded in many countrieswealthier than Ghana, such as Nigeria. In NorthernGhana, the use of FM radio for broadcastingdevelopment-oriented p rogrammes started in the early1980s with the establishment of the Upper Region Radio(URA) Sta t ion a t Bolgatanga which had theresponsibility of broadcasting development messagesin local languages to the peop le of the Upper East and

Upper West regions of northern Ghana. In 1997, asecond FM radio station, Radio Savanna, Tamale (RST),was established through collaborative efforts betweenGhana Broadcasting Corporation (GBC) and the Non-Formal Education Division of the Ministry of Education.The RST, like URA, broadcasts mainly in local languages,Dagbani and Gonja. It covers almost all the NorthernRegion with the exception of Saboba/Chereponi, EastMamprusi and Zabzugu/Tatale districts. More recentlystill, broadcasts have begun in the Upper West region,transmitting from Wa. The task of these stations is tou s e a p a r t i c i p a t o r y a p p r o a c h t o b r o a d c a s tdevelopment messages and non-formal educational

programmes.Apart from the national network, GBC, other radio

stations, especially in the regions, devote considerableair time to agricultural topics. One of the early examplesof using rural radio for agricultural extension was theWonsuom project. This was a grassroots developmentcommunication project in Swedru District, managedby the University of Ghana Communication Departmentand funded by UNESCO, started in 1983 (Obeng-Quaidoo, 1988). The project covered 18 villages andtowns with a combined population of 90,000. Accordingto 2000 estimates, Ghana has 18 FM and three shortwave radio stations, with a total of about 4.4 million

radios in use. This means that a sizable part of thepopulation (currently 18.5 million) is exposed to radiobroadcasts daily. Vernacular radio also exists in largeurban centres in the south, but these are commercialstations which do not necessarily see rural developmentas their mission.

Given this unusual situation, the team decided toexperiment with vernacular broadcasts in six locallanguages to extend the reach of the messages emergingfrom the study project. The core of the programmewas to be a drama. A skeleton script was written thensix acting troupes discussed it and adapted the textand situations to culturally appropriate forms for each

language group. The programme was produced in amagazine format, featuring drama, topical talk anddiscussion, interspersed with jingles and traditionalmusic. An hour-long draft was designed by a

collaborative team from UDS and ODI in February/ March 2001 and copies were distributed to the radioproducers in Tamale and Bolgatanga, as well as toextension workers and NGO rep resentatives who wereall involved in producing the programme andidentifying suitable farmers’ group s. The local languages

chosen are spoken in Northern Ghana (Dagbani andGonja at Radio Savanna, in Tamale, Northern Region,and Kusaal, Kasem, Gurune and Buli at Upper RegionRadio, at Bolgatanga, Upper East Region). Theprogramme was about an hour long and containedinformation and advice on the importance and practiceof SWC methods. It was broadcast three times in eachlanguage during March and April 2001.

Programm e designThe programme was designed to combine music anddrama with information from the presenter and SWCtopics discussed by a panel. The drama script was

prepared in outline by representatives from the UDSFaculty of Agricultural Engineering and a local NGO,Trax. The story featured male farmers d iscussing SWCon their land with each other and their wives. A manfrom the village tries to explain how to reduce the risk of soil erosion using such techniques as contourploughing to reduce water run-off from sloping landand the importance of preserving and planting trees.Scepticism amongst the farmers is used to air variouspoints of view about a range of conservation techniquessuch as using organic fertilisers or green manuring,reduced bush burning, control of chemical inputs forcash crops and migration strategies. The drama p resents

an extension officer and an educated farmer beingchallenged by farmers as to why they should changetheir current practices. Although light-hearted the dramashows the tensions inherent in sharing information ina local context, for instance what level of trust can beafforded to certain individuals by their peers and thestatus of such as extension agents. The issues exploredin the drama are shown in Box 3 but more importantly,by capturing agricultural issues in an entertainingformat, the programme aimed to highlight theimportance of sharing information in farmingcommunities and recognising that there are variouschannels of information available locally. The local

extension service, university, NGOs and local farmersall took part in the discussions after the drama wasbroad cast to help b uild on its themes and explain tol i s t ene rs who they shou ld con tac t fo r moreinformation.

Box 3 Programme messages

• Be aware of the dangers of bush-burning.• Consider alternatives to chemical fertili ser such as animal

manure and green manure from plants.• Agroforestry can help to improve soil fertility and prevent

erosion. Protect and plant trees where possible.• Be aware of the dangers to the long-term soil fertil ity of the

land of growing cash crops.• Consider investing time in farm improvements using soil and

water conservation techniques rather than migrating to urbanareas for short-term work.




8

The drama script was adapted locally by theproducers responsible for each of the six locallanguages to ensure the characters’ names andphraseology were suited to the target audience. Thestory line and themes remained the same but theapproach taken by the performers was specific to the

language and group in question. The performance inDagbani that was repeated for the final evaluationworkshop , for example, exploited the comic elementsof farmer scept ic ism over sugges t ions tha t aneighbouring farmer might have learnt something thatcould a lso be useful to him. The female ro le in village-level information transfer appeared to be a topicrelished equally by the performers and audiencealike.

Obviously, it is easier to make such programmesthan to ensure they are having the intended impact.For this reason it was decided to u se a sample surveyto try and establish farmers’ understanding and

impressions of the broadcasts. The rest of this sectiondescribes the methods used to measure impact, andthe results of the survey.

Audience rese arch m ethodsThe impact of the radio programme on the listeningpublic was estimated using a sample survey. Groupsof ten farmers were interviewed before the firsttransmission to create a baseline and to assess the levelof their knowledge of and attitudes towards SWC. Thefarmers were selected with the assistance o f officers of the regional extension service and NGOs working withfarmers on SWC problems. The criteria for selection

were that the farmers regularly listened to the radio(not necessarily their own) and that farming was theirprimary occupation. These farmers were thenspecifically requested to listen to the programmes. Atthe end o f the farming season, the impact of the radioprogramme was measured again, this time by going tothe field, to see if the farmers had actually applied theknowledge gained through the programme to their cropcultivation practices.

The study was conducted during the 2001 cultivationseason in six districts in the Upper East and NorthernRegions, chosen because the main language groups innorthern Ghana are spoken there. The baseline study

was carried out in Yapei, West Gonja (language, Gon ja),Tolon, Kumbungu (language, Dagbani), both inNorthern Region. In the Upper East Region it wasconducted in Bolgatanga ( language , Guruni) ,Navrongo, Kasena Nankana (language, Kasim), Binabu,Bawku East (language, Kusaal) and Wiaga-Kondoma,Builsa (language, Buli). A total of 60 farmers were

selected, 10 for each language.

Semi-structured questionnaires were used to collectthe relevant data on demographic characteristics, radioaudiences, use of chemical inputs, use of organicmaterials and alternative methods in agriculture,production problems with cash crops, and attitudestoward SWC prac t ices . Ques t ionnaires wereadministered thrice, the first set being the baseline studycarried out prior to the broadcasts, in March 2001.Following the broadcasts, in June 2001, a second set

of questions was administered to the same farmers, toassess the impact of the programme and how wellthey unde rstood the content. The final questions wereadministered after the harvest (October/November2001) in order to estimate how many of the interviewedfarmers actually applied advice from the radio

programme on their farms.The broad objectives of the study were:

• to identify target commun ities where farmers followradio broadcasts in their local language;

• to assess the general level of knowledge about SWCmethods prior to the broadcast;

• to d i s cove r wha t l eve l o f knowledge o runderstanding of SWC had been gained from theradio programme immediately after the broadcast;

• to gauge the extent to which farmers enjoyed theprogramme format and felt the information wasreadily accessible.

Demographic and socio-econo miccharacteristics profile of the farmerssurveyedThe average age of the farmers was 47 years (the rangewas 25–70). Only one of the 60 respondents wasfemale. The great majority were married (85%). Theaverage number of dependants in the respondents’households was eight, the minimum three and themaximum abou t 20. The main occupation was farming(96%). Other occupations mentioned were bicyclerepairing (men) and teaching and trading by the onlyfemale respondent. More than 60% had no formaleducation, 18% had completed middle schoo l, and 5%

attended some form of adult education. All the farmersinterviewed said that they listened to the radio regularly,and some 58% owned radio sets, the rest relied ontheir friends or neighbours. The average income of farmers involved in the study was estimated at about

160,200 cedis per month (US$23 in 2001).

Those involved in the radio study were mostly smallfarmers growing food crops such as groundnuts, maize,rice and millet. Other crops included sorghum, yam,cassava and cotton. Most farmers were growing fouror more crops. The size of farm plots was relativelysmall and most of the farmers (71%) relied on familylabour for cult ivation, the other 29% using acombination of extended household and family labour.The majority (85%) cultivated less than 4 ha of landfor their household needs. About 48% of therespondents said that they did not see any problemsin cultivating cash crops. However, about 52% statedthat those who farmed cash crops were still poor andhad to sell their cash crop in order to buy food. Theyalso said that those farmers cultivating cash crops endedup destroying the fertility of soil on their farms.

Most of those interviewed considered SWC to beimportant and some were actively practising many SWCtechniques, ranging from tree planting to compostmaking. The majority of the farmers stated that bushburning was not beneficial, while many consideredthat even non-economic trees should be left on thefarms. Asked about the benefits of having trees, thefarmers observed that they acted as wind breaks,




9

provided organic matter, fruit, shade, fodder, etc.Surprisingly, many farmers believed that chemicalfertiliser is actually harmful to the soil. This may beattributed to the rapid deterioration of the soil undercash crops such as cotton, where heavy fertiliser ratesare normal. The responden ts were of the view that the

use of organic rather than chemical fertilisers shouldbe en couraged.

Farmers’ reaction s to the radioprogrammeIn June 2001, after the radio programme had beentransmitted, the same target aud ience was questionedabout the con tent of the programme and their level of understanding of SWC matters. Three-quarters of therespond ents said that they understood the p rogrammewell, while some 7% were less confident. The resultsare presented in Table 2.

Asked if they believed the messages of the radioprogramme were true, 83% rep lied affirmatively, while17% would not answer the question. As to which partof the p rogramme they en joyed most, farmers rankedthe various parts as follows (Table 3).

They seem to have particularly enjoyed the drama.

Asked about the main messages in the programme,they gave the answers listed in Table 4.

All the broadcasts went out in the afternoon, between4 and 5 p.m. Most of the respondents (78.3%) agreedthat this was suitable, but if given a choice, they wouldhave preferred the evening, between 7 and 9 o ’clock.

In order to en sure that the farmers were n ot simplyseeking to please the interviewers by giving only

positive responses, two q uestions w ere asked invitingnega t ive v iews abou t the impor tance o f theprogramme’s topics (Table 5 and Table 6).

To outsiders, it may seem evident that farmers shouldpractise SWC measures; with access to worldwide data,the deleterious effects of any other strategy are all too

well-known . But real farmers live in a world of limitedcapital and labour resources; and in an individualhousehold, the expenditure on these may not justifythe return . Despite these constraints the results indicatethat the majority of the respondents had a genuinecommitment to the importance of SWC.

Final e valuation results: situation at theend of growing seasonAt the end of cultivation season, in the second half of October 2001, interviews with the same respondentswere carried out, followed by visits to farms todetermine how much o f the advice given b y the radio

programme was actually applied. The answersregarding the major areas covered by the programmeare presented below.

All the farmers interviewed were aware that bushburning is a harmful practice. But the radio p rogrammehad reinforced their decision not to burn. Asked whythey considered it harmful, after listening to the radioprogramme, farmers mentioned that it damaged thesoil (44%), destroyed the grass used for roofing thelocal houses (5.6%) and killed trees (5.6%), while othersmentioned that keep ing from burning enriched the soil(16.7%), and conserved soil and water (5.6%) whichshowed they understood the programme’s messagesabout bush burning. This basic message that limitingbush burning where possible is consistent with SWCtechniques is one which the discussion panels wereable to d evelop in greater detail.3

Frequency (n=89) Ranking

Proper soil and waterconservation practices 34 1Importance of tree planting 15 2The use of animal manure 12 3Prevention of bush burning 10 4Agro forestry and organicfarming 8 5How to make compost 3 6Proper way of farming 5 7Proper land preparationmethods 1 8=The use of crop residues asorganic matter 1 8=

Table 4 Perceived main messages of theprogramme

Table 2 Target audience’s understanding of radioprogramme

Responses Frequency (n=60) %

Understood well 45 75.0No response 8 13.3Understood but not well 6 10.0Had little understanding 1 1.7

*Respondents were permitted more than one response

Frequency (n=119*) RankingThe drama 41 1The talk 31 2The conclusion 15 3Music 11 4=The introduction 11 4=The jingle 8 5All 2 6

Table 3 Aspects of the programme mostenjoyed by farmers

Frequency (n=60) %

Strongly agree 1 1.7No response 3 5.0Not sure 9 15.0Agree 13 21.7Strongly disagree 16 26.7Disagree 18 30.0

Table 5 Whether we practise SWC techniquesor not farming will always continue

Frequency (n=60) %

Agree 3 5.0No response 4 6.7Strongly agree 6 10.0Not sure 7 11.7Disagree 13 21.7Strongly disagree 27 45.0

Table 6 There is no point in wasting time onsoil and water conservation




10

About 61% of farmers did not cut the trees on theirfarms, while about 33% did, to create more space forfood crops, for fuel wood, rafters, etc. Of the farmerswho confirmed that they cut the trees on their farms,about 38% said that they also planted them. Thosewho did not plant trees gave as the main reasons

scarcity of land, insecure tenure, lack of seedlings anddestruction of young trees by animals. The radioprogramme had had some influence on 94% of therespondents regarding their decisions whether or notto cut trees on their farms in future.

ConclusionsThe respondents , in genera l , l iked the radioprogramme, and the parts that they enjoyed most werethe drama and the group discussion between thepresenter, extension agents, NGO representative andthe invited farmers.

Understanding of soil and water conservation

practices, agroforestry and organic manuring seem tohave improved after listening to the programme. If similar programmes were to be transmitted regularly,they could be used as an educational tool, especiallyin the area of agroforestry, where farmers stated thatthere is a lack of information. Bush burning wasrecognised as a negative practice by almost all therespondents , even before the programme wastransmitted. The broadcast has, however, increased thefarmers’ resolve to reduce this practice on their ownfarms and in the immediate environment.

It can be concluded that the radio programme waswell received by the target audience, and the format

in which it was presented was popular and easilyunderstood. The vernacular used in the broadcast wasalso very important; this aspect made the p rogrammeimmediately acceptable. Drama, which formed a largepart of the programme, also contributed to itspopularity. Almost any type of information and advicecan be prep ared for radio transmission. However, thetiming, sustainability and continuity of these types of programmes must be taken into consideration for futurework. The programme would have had even moreeffect if continued over several cultivation seasons. Thebroadcasts should be timed to coincide with the startof the farming season and repeated at regular intervals,i.e., once or twice monthly, until harvest time.

4 IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT

Policy issuesRural radio has developed over the years into a well-established tool for both community empowermentand improving the information and communicationcapaci ty of remote rura l popula t ions . Thedevelopmental potential of rural radio is recognisedby international organisations, NGOs and governmentsalike through a wide array of sectoral foci. Efforts toimprove the transfer of knowledge for agriculturaldevelopment have been concentrated for some timeon improving the information interface betweenresearchers, extension agents and farmers. Theexperience of the vernacular radio programmes on soil

and water conservation described above illustrates thetype of interaction which can be achieved with farmersliving in remote rural commun ities through the use o f carefully designed content. In an era of rapidlydeve lop ing in fo rma t ion and communica t iontechnologies rural radio is a powerful mechanism for

l inking old and new technologies , providinginformation resources cheaply to those who need themmost to improve their livelihoods, whilst at the sametime strengthening existing resources of knowledge,enterprise and cultural identity.

Changes in the structure of agricultural extensionservices worldwide have led to an increased emphasison demand-driven, participatory and pluralisticmechanisms of information and technology transfer.Extension services are increasingly expected toencourage and facilitate farmer experimentation andenquiry. This corresponds to a shift towards moredemocratic and decentralised government frameworks

within which private sector and market based servicedelivery mechanisms can operate. The political andtechnological climate is therefore conducive to ruralradio and agricultural extension continuing to growand link together as part of wider developmentstrategies. However, in order to build on the currentpositive but often fragmented experience a morecomprehensive policy framework will need to beestablished, including the following:• national communication and media strategies that

incorporate pluralistic approaches to media withinthe more traditional centralised broadcasting andinformation systems;

• up-to-date sociolinguistic analyses of the numbersand geographical dispersal of minority languageswith potential for broadcasting;

• ICT s t ra tegies tha t cons tant ly explore howtechnological advances can best be integrated intoall national b roadcasting, government and researchnetworks over the medium to longer term;

• legislation and initial subsidies to support theestablishment of independent community radiobroadcasting;

• streamlined licensing and bureaucratic proceduresfor information services such as local FM stations,in terne t service providers and rura l te le -

communication services;• mainstreamed information and communication

development strategies in cross-sectoral budgetaryplanning processes such as PRSPs.Mains t reaming the development of loca l

broadcasting networks into cross-sectoral budgetaryplanning will be essential to cover both short-terminfras t ruc ture expans ion cos ts and long-termsustainability. Many rural radio stations are reliant onexternal donor funding for their existence and longer-term survival. This is likely to continue in theforeseeable future due to both the limited incomesand relatively low population densities of many ruralradio audience catchments. However with increasednetworking and innovative approaches to harnessingnew flexible information sharing technologies, localprogramming could benefit from a wider range of




11

materials that can be integrated cheaply into localprogrammes. A strategy attempting to create isolated,financially self-sustaining, community-based radiostations in the world’s poorest villages is an unrealisticapplication of the hegemonic privatisation paradigm.Efforts to privatise agricultural extension should not

necessarily include those extension services that arebeing provided by rural radio. Rural radio shouldrepresent the sort of legitimate low-cost, high-impactexpenditure that governments and donors continue tosupp ort with the savings afforded by the rationalisationand privatisation of public services in other areas.

5 CONCLUSIONSThe importance of providing a long-term strategicapproach to the establishment of rural radio n etworkscan be seen to be threefold. First, the legal framework setting out the constitutional authority for the operationof independent broadcasting is a fundamental

requirement s t i l l required in many developingcountries. This coincides with the political project of international democratisation and decentralisation of power and con trol as a means to improve governancestructures in general. Second, cross-sectoral budgetaryplanning will increasingly be a prerequisite forinternational donor funding in developing countries.National strategies that allow for the combineddevelopment impact of rural radio across a range of sectors such as health, education and agriculturalextension could help to ensure the longer-termsustainability of local broadcasting through more stableand longer-term funding; and a rational expenditure

schedule that corresponds to the regional spatial andsectoral priorities for cross-sectoral development.Finally, the coordination of technological developmentsand information network integration needs to retainlocal autonomy whilst ensuring the full potential of the technology available is harnessed. Digital satelliteradio receivers, for example, are presently tooexpensive (around $100) to be used individually byfarmers but could be employed strategically by therural radio networks and extension services to maximiseinformation sharing. Without comprehensive nationalstrategies the reliance on state-run information networkscould be replaced less by community-based, participatorycommunication than by the information networks of theeven less relevant international mass media.

There is an interesting combination of approachesin the use of rural radio for agricultural extension. Onthe one hand they are locally focused, using indigenousknowledge to build on local cultural and agro-ecological diversity. On the other hand there is aninherent didactic, progressive, developmental aspectthat reinforces external cultural priorities by embracingchange based on technical and scientific knowledge.Historically, agricultural extension has often failed tocommunicate technical information to farmers in a waythat has enabled it to be adopted locally. Thecombination of approaches encapsulated in the bestexamples of rural radio based extension strike aneffective balance between indigenous and scientificapproaches to agricultural development. There are,

however, likely to continue to be considerablechallenges in the future in providing farmers,extensionists and radio broadcasters with the trainingand skills to manage the burgeoning information supplyfor practical poverty-reducing outcomes. In the midstof a digital revolution a pragmatic focus on increasing

access to community radio by small-scale farmers inareas with little or no electricity and no formalexperience of the extension service would go a longway towards improving agricultural development andrural livelihoods in many developing countries.

REFERENCESAdhikarya, R. (1994) Strategic extension campaign. A

participatory-oriented method of agricultural

exten sion. A case study of FAO’s experien ces. Rome:FAO.

Amanor, K. (2001) Discourse coalitions and the politicsof fire in Ghana. Unpublished draft. University of

Ghana, Legon.Ansu-Kyeremeh, K. (1992) ‘Cultural aspects of

constraints on village education by radio’. Media,

Cultu re & Society, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 111–28.Blench, R. and Slaymaker, T. (2002a) Rethinking natural

resource degradation in sub-Saharan Africa:

Policies to support sustainable soil fertility

management, soil and water conservation among

resource-poor farmers in semi-arid areas. Volume

1 – Country Overviews. Tamale, Ghana: ODI andUDS.

Blench, R. and Slaymaker, T. (2002b) Rethinking natural

resource degradation in sub-Saharan Africa: Policies

to support sustainable soil fertility management, soilan d water conservation among resource-poor farmers

in semi-arid areas. Volume 2 – Coun try Case Studies.Tamale, Ghana: ODI and UDS.

Blench, R. and Slaymaker, T. (2002c) Pour une nouvelle

approche de la lutte contre la dégradation des

ressources naturelles en Afrique subsaharienne:

Etudes de cas men ées en Afriqu e de l’Ouest . Sénégal:ENDA.

Brown, D., Howes, M., Hussein, K., Longley, C. andSwindell, K. (2002) ‘Participatory methodologies andpractices: Assessing PRA use in the Gambia’.

Agricultural Research and Extension Network Paper

No. 124, London: ODI.Chambers, R. (1994) ‘Participatory rural appraisal (PRA):

Analysis of experience’. World Development , Vol. 22,No. 9, pp. 1253–68.

Chapman, R. and Slaymaker, T. (2002) ‘ICTs and ruraldevelopment: Review of the literature, currentinterventions and opportunities for action’. ODI

Working Paper No. 192. London: ODI.Coldevin, G. (2000) Participatory communication an d

adu lt learnin g for rural development . Rome: FAO.Communication Initiative (2002) Hatemolo radio

programme in Nepal. Programme description.Downloaded on 12/12/02 from the CommunicationInitiative website: www.comminit.com

Dagron, A. (2001) ‘Making waves: Stories of participatory Communication for Social Change’.New York: Rockefeller Foundation.



Network Papers cost £3.00 sterling each (plus postage & packing).This paper may be downloaded free of charge from the AgREN website at: www.odi.org.uk/agren

Please contact the Network Administrator at:The Overseas Development Institute, 111 Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7JD, UKTelephone: +44 (0)20 7922 0300 Fax: +44 (0)20 7922 0399 Email: [email protected]

Information about ODI and its publications can be found on our website at:http://www.odi.org.uk/

FAO/CTA (2001) In ternationa l workshop on farm Radio

broadcasting; Rome, 19–22 February 2001.

Information and communication technologiesServ ic ing farm radio: New contents , new

partnerships. Final Report. Rome: FAO.FAOSTAT (1998) FAO on-line statistical database. http:/

/apps.fao.org/ FAO/ WAICENT/SDR (2000a) ‘FarmNe t Far me r

Information Network for Agricultural and RuralDevelopment’. Research, Extension and TrainingDivision (SDR), WAICENT. Rome: FAO.

FAO/ WAICENT/SDR (2000b ) VERCON Virtual

Extension, Research an d Comm un ication Network .Research, Extension and Training Division (SDR),WAICENT. FAO, Rome.

Fardon, R. and Furniss, G (eds) (2000) African broadcast cultures: Radio in transition . Harare, Zimbabwe:Baobab Publishing and Oxford: James Currey.

Girard, B. (2001) ‘The challenges of ICTs and ruralradio’. Paper presented at the First InternationalWorkshop on Farm Radio Broadcasting, 19–22February 2001, FAO, Rome.

Grätz, T. (2000) ‘New local radio stations in Africanlanguages & processes of political transformation. Thecase of Radio Rurale Locale Tanguiéta’ in R. Fardon,and G. Furniss, (eds) (2000) African broadcast

cultures: Radio in transition . Harare, Zimbabwe:Baobab Publishing and Oxford: James Currey.

Hambly Odame, H. and Kassam, A. (2002) ‘Listeningto stakeholders: Agricultural research and rural Radiolinkages’. Briefing Paper 48, The Netherlands:ISNAR.

Heeks, R. (1999) ‘Information and communicationtechnologies, poverty and development’. Paper No.5, Development Informatics Working Paper Series.Manchester, UK: Institute for Development Policyand Management (IDPM).

Hilliard, R.L. (2001) ‘Farm and rural radio: Somebeginnings and mode ls’. Paper p resented at the FirstIn terna t ional Workshop on Farm RadioBroadcasting, 19–22 February 2001, FAO, Rome.

Ilboudo, J.P. (2001) ‘Rural radio: Africa’s internet’.pub lished o n FAO website (downloaded 11/12/ 02)www.fao.org/News/ 2001/011205-e.htm

Ilbou do, J.P. (2000) ‘Prospects for ru ral radio in Africa’,in R. Fardon, and G. Furniss, (eds) (2000) African

broadcast cultures: Radio in transition . Harare,Zimbabwe: Baobab Publishing and Oxford: JamesCurrey.

Mundy, P. and Sultan, J. (2001) In formation revolutions:

How in format ion and communica t ion

management is changing the lives of rural people.Wageningen, Netherlands: Technical Centre for

Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EC). CTA.Myers, M. (2000) ‘Community radio and development’,in R. Fardon, and G. Furniss, (eds) (2000) African

broadcast cultures: Radio in transition . Harare,Zimbabwe: Baobab Publishing and Oxford: JamesCurrey.

Mytton, G. (2000) ‘From saucepan to dish. Radio andTV in Africa’, in R. Fardon, and G. Furniss, (eds)(2000) African broadcast cultures: Radio in transition .Harare, Zimbabwe: Baobab Publishing and Oxford:James Currey.

Nombré, U. (2000) ‘The evolution of radio broadcastingin Burkina Faso’, in R. Fardon, and G. Furniss, (eds)

(2000) African broadcast cultures: Radio in transition .Harare, Zimbabwe: Baobab Publishing and Oxford:James Currey.

Norrish, P. (1998) ‘Radio and video for development’,in FAO (1998) The first mile of connectivity.

Advancing te lecommunicat ions for rural

development through a par t ic ipatory

comm un ication a pproach. Rome: FAO.Obeng-Quaidoo, I . , (1988) Assessment of the

experience in the production of messages andprogrammes for rural communication systems: Thecase of the Wonsuom Project in Ghana. Gazette

No. 42, pp. 53–67.

Querre, F. (1992) “A thousan d and on e worlds”, a Rural Radio Handbook . Rome: FAO.

Richardson, D. (1997) ‘The internet and rural &agricultural development: An integrated approach’.Paper prepared for the FAO. TeleCommonsDevelopment Group, Ontario, Canada.

Roling, N. (1995) ‘What to think of extension? AComparison of three models of extension practice’.

AERDD Bulletin.

ENDNOTES1 For a discussion of ICTs see Chapman, R. and

Slaymaker, T. (2002) ‘ICTs and Rural Development:

Review of the Literature, Current Interventions andOpportunities for Action’. ODI Working PaperNo. 192. www.odi.org.uk

2 Ghana, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda, Nigeria andBurkina Faso.

3 There are a number of political, cultural and agro-ecological considerations surrounding the topic of bush burning that are discussed in detail byAmanor, K. (2001) Discourse coalitions and thepolitics of fire in Ghana. Unpublished draft.

agrenpaper_127

Documents