Reconceptualising Communication for Development: An Introduction

Abstract

Communication plays a crucial role in driving social change. Communication for Development (C4D) is a field that highlights the importance of communication in development, concentrating on how to effectively use a diverse range of media and communication channels that enable the inclusion, expression, and exchange of different voices in the development process in order to bring about social transformation. Over the past few decades, C4D has undergone both an evolution and a revolution in its approaches and methods. This has led to the growth of a distinctive and at the same time diverse field, both theoretically and in practical forms. This Special Issue reviews critically the reconceptualisation of C4D that has progressively occurred and from which an interesting and at times contested landscape has emerged. It presents a range of both scholarly and practical perspectives that provide a comprehensive account of what the field has to offer today. This essay provides both a conceptual and historical introduction to the collection of articles included in this Issue and positions them within the new propositions and methods of the present-day field of C4D.

1. Introduction

Communication plays a crucial role in driving social change. Communication for Development (C4D) is a field that highlights the importance of communication in development, concentrating on how to effectively use a diverse range of media and communication channels that enable the inclusion, expression, and exchange of different voices in the development process in order to bring about social transformation. For many, this practice now also provides a set of tools to engage in a dialogic form of communication for social justice.

Over the past few decades, C4D has undergone both an evolution and a revolution in its approaches and methods. This has led to the growth of a distinctive and at the same time diverse field, both theoretically and in practical forms. Firstly, this field has established itself both as a notable academic discipline and as a conceptual framework for rethinking participation and inclusion in development. At the same time, on-the-ground application has extended and expanded into multiple sub-realms, which have seen the institutionalisation of different areas of C4D practice.

The field of development communication is inherently complex. It involves the intersection of two multidisciplinary areas—communication and development—while aiming to facilitate the intricate process of social change. This complexity is further heightened by the constantly evolving nature of the field, where new ideas are continuously introduced and often challenge or contradict existing ones. As a result, the field is shaped by a variety of ideas that can be both viable and unworkable, depending on factors such as context, culture, and other variables that influence individuals and communities (Salem 2022).

Communication and information are fundamental not only in everyday life but also at the heart of central theories and models across various disciplines. The goal extends beyond simply understanding communication in its current form: it also involves critically assessing environments through a communication lens. To effectively address societal issues, communication research must adapt its perspectives and methods to actively intervene in society, combat inequalities, and contribute to creating environments where nations and individuals can thrive based on their own efforts. It is essential to develop approaches that evaluate contexts from a communicative standpoint, focusing on the interactions between key actors who shape these environments, and understanding how relationships among these actors are constructed and evolve. This approach will help create more equitable, inclusive, and empowering conditions for development and social progress (Diago 2019). As Dutta (2018) has argued, we need to regard communication

‘[…] as voice in resistance to the neoliberal formations of development by hegemonic state, market and civil society actors emerges from the margins, continually attending to the practices of erasure that produce the margins and seeking to undo these erasures’.

(p. 88)

Further to that, as the global focus has shifted from traditional development, which adopted a rapid problem-solving often decontextualised from its broader reality, to sustainable development, aimed at setting in motion mechanisms that consider the long-term consequences on a community, the media landscape has also been evolving, reshaping the media’s role in the process. This evolution has necessitated the creation of new roles for the media and the development of innovative communication approaches that support sustainability-driven solutions (Salem 2022). The goal has also been to challenge conventional methods of programme design, implementation, and monitoring, with the aim of enhancing the impact and sustainability of international development initiatives. This is particularly relevant in programmes focused on behaviour development and change, such as those coordinated by UNICEF, where new approaches seek to ensure more effective and lasting outcomes in improving the wellbeing of communities (Servaes and Malikhao 2020). At the same time, what has been required includes a reframing of communication as a transdisciplinary concept, whose role must be observed through the lens of a complex prism that assists in the formation of different points of analysis, which keep this field relevant to contemporary development processes. This is how C4D has advanced.

2. Steps Forward

The very first iteration of Communication for Development aimed to achieve positive social change through media and education in a rather linear way (McPhail 2009). This approach to knowledge transfer is linked to communication models derived from Modernisation theory, which typically employ a top-down method of communication and development. With time, C4D interventions have shifted away from solely concentrating on individual behaviour, a focus common in many past initiatives, and have instead adopted a more comprehensive, intersectoral perspective. In practice, this transition has involved evaluating all the factors necessary for change and determining how communication can address those factors, and which ones it can impact (Mefalopulos 2018).

Generally, there is now broader agreement on the value of a participatory approach, which emphasises local ownership of development through active community involvement. A participatory approach in Communication for Development wants to empower individuals and foster social change through societal transformation (Servaes and Malikhao 2008). This process takes place through a dialogical form of communication, which involves sharing diverse perspectives, values, cultures, and experiences among participants (Otto and Fourie 2017). Dialogue is viewed as a continuous process of reflection that encourages participants to critically assess their own situations, recognise challenges, and develop solutions collaboratively (Otto and Fourie 2017; Polk and Servaes 2015). It also emphasises cultural sensitivity by integrating indigenous knowledge, traditional beliefs and cultural symbols into development strategies tailored to specific communities (Cahyono 2019). Participants are encouraged to be actively involved throughout the entire development process, from initial decision-making to final implementation, and in the monitoring and evaluation phases (Servaes and Malikhao 2008). In this Communication for Development approach, the exchange of information, dialogue, and different cultural practices is considered an essential step in the empowerment process, and not simply a way to achieve predetermined objectives (Bezuidenhout and Fourie 2023).

This, in turn, goes with the recognition that most rural people receive information about new technologies not through the media but through friends, family, neighbours and colleagues in related fields. As Servaes and Malikhao (2020) have posited, ‘communication, media and ICTs are important tools in achieving social change, but their use is not an end in itself. Interpersonal communication, traditional and group media must also play a fundamental role’ (p. 20). This is why, when using indigenous communication methods, it is important to explore rural environments to understand the traditional ways of passing on information, skills, beliefs, values and heritage from one generation to the next. indigenous communication can only be effective when it combines the indigenous knowledge of the community with the new information being shared through these traditional channels. For communication to bring transformation here, the participation of Indigenous people is crucial, and it goes beyond merely accepting the ideas transmitted through these channels. These factors are key to the success of indigenous Communication for Development initiatives (Mbakogu 2015).

More recently, technological progress and digitisation have significantly impacted the field of communication. Emerging digital platforms offer a fresh, non-linear model for development communication, moving away from the traditional one-way or top-down approaches. These platforms enable dynamic, interactive, and multi-directional communication, as well as diverse forms of citizen involvement (Tufte 2013). They have also created opportunities for marginalised communities to actively contribute to their nation’s development, while strengthening the capacity of citizens and non-governmental organisations to participate in media advocacy (Salem 2022).

The C4D framework has been widely applied to examine various Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) initiatives, including telecentres, village phone programmes, e-health, e-government kiosks, and others. It has been used to establish a clear link between communication technology interventions and their impact on development-related behavioural changes. Communication interventions involving ICTs cover areas such as access to and exchange of information, knowledge creation, open access to knowledge, strategic communication, and the development of information and communication infrastructure and technologies. ICT interventions enhance knowledge, which is expected to improve individual productivity, thus contributing positively to the development of both individuals and organisations (Hoque et al. 2016).

Building on the progress highlighted thus far, this Special Issue offers a comprehensive range of perspectives on C4D that span from feminist theories, communication for social change, health communication, rural communication, indigenous forms of communication, social movements, social media and ICTs. The following section brings to light the distinctiveness of each contribution, reminding the reader of the abundant opportunities for research inquiries in this area that can bring about significant input and critical analysis for the broader field.

3. The Diverse and Rich Facets of Communication for Development Today

The work produced for this Special Issue reviews critically the reconceptualisation of C4D that has progressively occurred, and from which an interesting and at times contested landscape has emerged. It presents a range of both scholarly and practical perspectives that provide a comprehensive account of what the field has to offer today. Through the work of scholars as well as research partners, this collection celebrates the advances in this field and the diverse array of approaches that have come to drive both the study and the practical design of communication in development contexts.

Through theory. Theorising in Communication for Development provides a framework for understanding the complex processes through which communication contributes to social change. Theories in C4D guide both practice and research, helping to shape strategies but also conceptual approaches that are relevant to current debates and future applications. In this context, Wilkin’s, Tufte’s and Govender’s writings (this issue) contribute distinctive inquiries to this review of the field, which illuminate the multifaceted nature of C4D and demonstrate its significance across different realms of study.

Wilkins critiques the narrative that celebrates digital technologies as tools for enhancing participatory governance, entrepreneurship, and collective activism, offering a feminist perspective that highlights the political and economic factors shaping access to voice, the ability to listen, and opportunities for dialogue. This analysis views mediated communication not as a mirror reflecting existing realities but as a prism that shapes both our opportunities and challenges in driving social change. To create meaningful change, Wilkins argues, we must remain accountable to social justice, using critical assessments and informed discussions to pave the way for more effective communication for social transformation. A critical evaluation of feminist perspectives provides a valuable framework for rethinking our understanding of development and the role communication can play in effective interventions. Over time, Communication for Development has evolved from neglecting women’s issues to acknowledging gender differences in experiences. It has also highlighted the importance of participatory processes. Yet, current strategies are still falling short in both effectiveness and ethical considerations. Wilkins urges how, at this point, it is crucial to take further steps to foster a more humanitarian approach to C4D that can guide institutional practices in both programmes and research.

Tufte draws attention to the growing call, among communication and development scholars, for pedagogies aimed at social change, highlighting forms of resistance, critique, and new practices emerging in the field. His review article engages with a ‘pedagogical turn’, arguing that it is within these pedagogies that we can find pathways to unlearn and relearn communication for social change. Through a decolonial analytical lens, the article tackles what defines these critical pedagogies and how these can contribute to an unlearning and relearning within the field of communication and social change. Tufte discusses the implications of unlearning through critical pedagogies for redefining the field of communication and social change by suggesting critical areas for future research.

Govender explores the interdisciplinary perspectives that combine principles from Communication for Development and social change with public health, through a process of divergence and convergence that leads to new ways of thinking about decision-making. A central theme in this discourse is viewing many health issues as development challenges first, recognising the importance of community responses during pandemics, while simultaneously empowering individuals to make informed decisions. This approach to health communication, which the author refers to as Communicating for Health-as-Development (C4HD), emphasises health as a form of development, addressing the complex, one-way, non-process-oriented, and often non-data-driven aspects of health outcomes. Real development, Govender argues, occurs through “messy” health communication efforts. Using examples from HIV and COVID-19, her paper highlights ongoing developments in the field and the convergence of public health and Communication for Development, while celebrating interdisciplinarity.

From the practice. Practical applications in the field of Communication for Development are critical to include the voices of those who hold local knowledge and expertise to tackle development-related problems. As expounded previously, this aspect of the field has been conceptualised over the years through the participatory communication paradigm that has accompanied the evolution of C4D. Authors such as Tufte and Mefalopulos (2009) and Servaes and Lie (2013), amongst others, have discussed how enabling communities to participate in and drive development processes starts with communication.

In this Special Issue, Cardey, Eleazar, Ainomugisha, Kalowekamo and Vlasenko have explored what rural development means today in the context of environmental change and how this, in turn, reshapes the conceptualisation and practice of C4D. Rural areas around the world are undergoing significant changes, often marked by heightened vulnerability to climate and environmental shifts, extreme weather events, conflict, socio-economic changes, inequalities, and demographic transitions. These transformations are putting pressure on rural communities, whose livelihoods depend on agriculture and natural resources. Communication for Development has played a key role in addressing these challenges by introducing tools to work directly with these communities in a way that is inclusive and takes into account their concerns and practical solutions. These authors introduce case studies from Malawi, Ukraine and the Philippines—countries that represent contrasting rural development and environmental change challenges—to offer lessons that provide valuable insights into C4D thinking and practice.

Herrera-Huérfano, Ochoa-Almanza and Sanz’s contribution to this Special Issue suggests rethinking communication, development and social change through a decolonial lens, using the case study of the Ticoya resguardo in Colombia. The oral traditions of Indigenous elders shape a history of the land, positioning orality as a practice of communicative and cognitive justice that challenges the dominant frameworks of the nation-state. The article analyses border tensions both as a tangible reality between Colombia and Peru, and as a metaphor for identity struggles. The theoretical framework applied by these authors draws on debates surrounding post-development, the pluriverse, and Southern epistemologies, questioning social inequalities. In this distinctive reality, the creation of a radio series plays a central role in capturing elders’ stories through conversations, social mapping, and storytelling. Herrera-Huérfano, Ochoa-Almanza and Sanz (this issue) delineate how, once linear narratives are broken, an understanding of territory transcends state borders and identity struggles among river communities. Through the case of the Ticoya resguardo, and with an emphasis on the need for a decolonial approach to communication, these authors elucidate how communicative justice can elevate local and everyday experiences.

Dyll and Tomaselli (this issue) explore the role of communication in local and indigenous cultures in relation to development initiatives. These scholars draw on the example of the !Xaus Lodge, a cultural tourism project in the South African Kalahari desert that is community-owned, state-funded and privately operated, to demonstrate how C4D strategies, informed by ‘applied cultural studies’, can empower local communities to drive development and mutual understanding. Their contribution to this Special Issue shows how these strategies can navigate the complexities of diverse stakeholder interests, cultural backgrounds, and worldviews in a specific geographic context. Dyll and Tomaselli offer a unique perspective on Communication for Development, arguing that when viewed through a cultural studies lens, this practice enhances the potential for democratisation and participation in community-driven development and social change processes. Together with ‘applied cultural studies’, C4D can foster agency by providing opportunities for voice and self-representation in social interventions. The authors bring to light how this cultural studies approach—originally rooted in the Birmingham School, influenced by Marxist development theory, and first adopted during the South African anti-apartheid struggle to develop cultural strategies—has now been applied to indigenise research practices in the southern Kalahari.

On reflecting further. The multifaceted nature of Communication for Development opens up spaces to reflect on and reconceptualise this field from less demarcated perspectives. Contributions in this area bring to light the potential of C4D that is still untapped, and present ways in which the application of a C4D lens to diverse inquiries can lead to compelling outcomes.

Noske-Turner, Sivaram, Kalley and Hiremath (this issue) have argued here that using social media for social change effectively requires adopting a “hacker” mindset to develop strategies that subvert, resist, and adapt the logic of these platforms, alongside an ecological approach to understanding media and communication. This contribution utilises the idea of metaphors to provide a practical framework to give shape to these concepts. The current era of digital capitalism presents challenges for Communication for Development, both in theory and practice: on the one hand, mainstream social media platforms have become an integral part of the daily media practices for an increasing number of people worldwide; on the other hand, the profit-driven nature of these platforms often makes them hostile environments for discussions aimed at progressive social change. These authors delve into civil society organisations’ use of capitalist-driven social media platforms in their development and social change work, and into the challenges and compromises they face, whether consciously or unconsciously. This critical exploration draws on insights from workshops held with IT for Change, a non-governmental organisation in India that critiques the political and economic dominance of Big Tech in the Global South.

Pathak-Shelat and Bhatia (this issue) analyse the neoliberal framework of Information and Communication Technology for Development (ICT4D) as a model that imposes oversimplified and linear notions of empowerment and development on users from the Global South. Focusing on the rapidly expanding EdTech sector in India, this contribution questions the role of EdTech as a transformative solution for countries like India, which face the challenge of educating their large population. Drawing on immersive ethnographic research with youth from low-income families in three Indian cities—Ahmedabad, Delhi and Vadodara—this work wants to highlight how young people’s interactions with EdTech resist this standardisation. The analysis put forward identifies three key factors that shape how low-income students and families perceive and engage with the promises of access, equity, and quality made by EdTech companies and governments: issues of access and autonomy, the continued importance of place-based learning and in-person interactions, and disparities in the quality and rigor of content. The importance of considering the socio-economic and cultural contexts of young learners in the Global South is brought to light, with an emphasis on the needs that learners have towards personalised, place-based experiences; mentorship; high academic achievements, and face-to-face interactions that are juxtaposed to the one-size-fits-all solutions. These authors contend that young people are presently unable to fully benefit both from these experimental DIY practices and from the tech-driven learning opportunities offered by these platforms; this is due to the fact that EdTech, in its current form, does not fully meet these needs.

Ayres, Vega-Casanova and Cabrera (this issue) discuss how, following the advancements in civil and human rights during the twentieth century, social movements have come to be seen as key agents of social change. Even Oyedemi (2018) observes that ‘social movements can be understood as formations through which a collective voice is projected for social change’ (p. 10). Yet, as underscored by this contribution, certain citizen mobilisations are not always aimed at driving social transformations that benefit the most marginalised groups. Examples of these are the acts of vandalism that targeted public institutions in Brazil in January 2023, the anti-democratic mobilisations that occurred in Colombia in opposition to the peace agreement with its Revolutionary Armed Forces FARC, and the strifes that took place in Chile against a proposed, more inclusive constitution. Worldwide, anti-democracy movements and those opposing human rights are gaining momentum, negatively impacting the realities in which organisations advocating for excluded groups operate. In contrast to this, Latin American approaches to social and behaviour change (SBC) stress the importance of engaging in social movements to promote social justice and form alliances that amplify the voices of those most affected by a lack of justice, while respecting the organic nature of citizen-led actions. This essay explores questions that address the contrast between the popular roots and the hegemonic interests of social movements, looking both at how the Latin American tradition of social movement theory and practice can inform strategies for effective social change, and at SBC strategies’ contribution to this through combating anti-human rights movements while empowering social movements that advocate for inclusion.

4. Concluding Remarks

The field of Communication for Development has undergone significant transformation over the decades, evolving from early top-down models to more participatory, interactive, culturally sensitive, and even technology-driven approaches. This shift reflects broader changes in society that have redefined the ways in which communication is conducted and how social change is pursued. Today, communication is seen as a tool for empowerment, collaboration, and collective action, rather than merely a means for information dissemination.

Current theories and methods such as feminist perspectives, critical pedagogy, participatory and indigenous communication, health-based approaches to communication, behaviour change, ICT4D and social movements, align closely with the practices of C4D in emphasising reflection, collaboration and mutual learning. This also reflects an understanding of the importance of local knowledge and context in driving meaningful social change.

At the same time, as this Special Issue underscores, the challenges of inequality, misinformation and power dynamics persist, highlighting the need for continued innovation in theory and practice. The future of C4D is expected to produce further strategies and conceptual ideas that are adaptable, inclusive, and capable of addressing both local and global challenges. As we move forward, the field will continue to evolve, guided by an ongoing commitment to social justice, inclusiveness, and the transformative power of communication in creating a better future.