CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Land Reform and its Circumventions: Marginalizing the Peasants
The agrarian situation in the Philippines shows the intertwined story of feudalism and peasants’ struggle to reclaim the land brought about by the various government schemes that resulted in more landless farmers – examples of which are outlined below.
The World Bank prescribed three agricultural policies for the Philippine government as follows: first, is the involvement of the “quasi-public aid” to formulate the macro-economic policies as part of the conditions of their loans; second, is “international trade” or more popularly known as the free trade policy; and third, are the presence of multinational corporations (TNCs) that have increasingly shaped the development of international agricultural production in many parts of the globe (Fortin , 2005).
When former President Ferdinand Marcos was ousted in 1986, the agrarian sector hoped that the administration of Corazon Aquino would give farmers the opportunity to finally own the lands that they were cultivating. Ironically, as already mentioned, it was during this era that the “Mendiola Massacre” occurred.
The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) which was passed into law during Aquino’s term aimed to complete the acquisition and distribution of the 1.6 million hectares of private and public alienable agricultural lands to agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs); transform these ARBs into empowered, responsible, and progressive new breeds of owner-cultivators and entrepreneurs that would contribute significantly to national economic growth and development; and deliver fair and just agrarian justice. It also aimed to provide just compensation to dispossessed land owners and legal assistance for affected agrarian reform farmers (Department of Agrarian Reform primer, 2008).
More than 20 years have passed since the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of 1988 was enacted into law by the Congress of the Philippines. This is considered a huge failure for many landless peasants because it failed to address the root problem of raising the quality of life of the farmers and peasants (http://www.bulatlat.com, accessed 2007). The program, according to Riedinger (1995), failed to implement the more controversial and costly elements of the reform policy. Simply put, land transfer could be costly for the farmers who could not even afford to pay a lawyer to title their lands, while handling such titled lands could also be hard for most farmers.
In the succeeding years, the government passed such a bewildering and vague variety of agrarian-related programs, laws, administrative orders, memoranda, and legal precedents that it became easier for the landowners, along with the concerned government agencies, to circumvent the provisions and original intentions of the CARL.
The passing of Republic Act of 8435, otherwise known as the Agricultural and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA) of 1997, further worsened the situation of farmers and fisher folks. Despite the promises of agricultural glory by the then President Joseph Estrada in his Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan, AFMA, along with Estrada’s other land reform programs, was considered a big failure by different peasant movements, (Ramos, 2000). Landowners have also developed schemes such as land conversion in order to circumvent the government’s agrarian reform program (Kelly, 1998).
The joint venture arrangement, also known as “cooperative scheme,” was resorted to by some landlords to overrule the CARP. The most famous of them was Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco, a known crony of Marcos, and one of the biggest landlords in the country. Cojuangco’s scheme for the program was met with criticisms by peasant organizations when he negotiated the arrangement with coconut farmers. Cojuangco created a cooperative wherein he was the major stockholder. All the farmer-beneficiaries were forced to be members of the cooperative, and they had to give up their land titles for that scheme. This intensified the anger of coconut farmers who then launched a series of local and national protests. The Pambansang Koalisyon ng mga Samahan ng mga Magsasaka at Manggagawa sa Niyugan (PKSMMN), a national coalition of 30 small coconut organizations with a membership of 350,000 small coconut farmers nationwide, denounced it (http://www.philsol, December 2008).
Laguna: A Microcosm of the Land Reform Problem
Laguna experienced the same peasant struggles in land reform as that of other regions occupied by the Spaniards. In 1577, the Franciscan missionaries arrived in Manila. Thereafter, they started evangelizing people in Laguna as they did in other parts of the country. Like the Augustinian priests, they helped organize the government. During this period, the King of Spain awarded tracts of land to some families in its dominion called encomiendas. This system entitled the encomiendero, the recipient, to collect tributes from the natives. Since then, the chosen clans have been able to secure ownership of a big percentage of land in the province (http://www.laguna.gov.ph, September 2008).
The hacienda system was also implemented in various parts of Laguna. The colonial government in 1689 declared Santa Rosa, Binan and Calamba, all barrios of Cabuyao – as haciendas. Land was either awarded to influential loyal subjects of the king, or sold through auction to religious orders. Rice and sugarcane were grown in these haciendas.
From 1887 to 1892, the hacienda became a subject of controversies. Misunderstandings ensued between the administration and the tenants regarding unreasonable land levies. One such dispute involved Rizal’s father, Francisco Mercado, a “tenant” of the Dominican friars who were the landlords of the hacienda.
Dr. Jose Rizal, a native of Calamba, who was then in Madrid, advocated the cause of the Filipino farmers in his homeland and fought for their rights in the courts of Spain. Rizal amplified the issues through his propaganda activities and his two novels, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. Both books portrayed the social ills that perturbed the Philippines under Spanish rule. Such advocacy led to the prosecution of Rizal’s family and friends. The Spanish government later deported Rizal to Dapitan in the southern part of the Philippines and ultimately executed him in Bagumbayan (now Luneta Park). His execution helped spark the violent revolution against the Spanish colonizers of 1896 led by Andres Bonifacio and Emilio Aguinaldo.
When the Americans occupied Laguna in the early 1900s, most of the local inhabitants were freed from the encomienderos, and given the right to own the lands they tilled (http://www.laguna.gov.ph, September 2008).
At present, about 126,662 of the 175,973 hectares total land area in Laguna (72%) have been classified and certified either as alienable and disposable and 49,311 hectares (38%) as forest lands (http://www.laguna.gov.ph, accessed September, 2008).
Data from the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) shows that Region IV, where Laguna is included, has the most number of approved plans for land use conversion. This may be termed as “regional urbanization” wherein people from the rural areas are forced to live in towns. The supposedly fertile lands for rice, corn, and other crops have been converted to a variety of urban and industrial uses: export processing zones and industrial estates; institutions such as hospitals and universities; leisure landscapes such as golf courses, resorts and theme parks; and, most significantly in terms of the area involved, residential subdivisions (Kelly, 1998).
Table 1. Approved lands for conversion in the Philippines, 1995
Region Approved Disapproved * Exempted ** Total
CAR 38 0 9 47
I 70 2 0 72
II 166 7 26 198
III 2,223 348 703 3,274
IV 7,029 305 13,022 20,358
V 178 59 45 281
VI 1,325 227 431 1,984
VII 208 164 6 378
VIII 76 90 302 468
IX 241 0 38 279
X 913 201 2,576 3,690
XI 1,971 217 99 2,286
XII 300 0 92 393
14,739 1,619 17,348 33,707
Source: Unpublished data from DAR, Quezon City, July 1995.
* Disapproved for conversion but converted anyway
** Exempted through Department of Justice Opinion 44. Exemption figures are updated only to July 1994.
Various other land conversion strategies are being employed so as not to implement the agrarian reform program in Laguna. In Batangas, Cavite, and Laguna, the DENR and the provincial governments have allowed land developers to convert rice fields into industrial areas, resorts, and golf courses, especially during the 1990s. Laguna now has 18 industrial parks, offering various opportunities for jobs and enterprises and yielding various products ranging from foodstuffs, handicrafts, semi-conductors, home appliances, and automobiles.
Another common strategy is keeping the land idle. Landlords can simply pay “disturbance compensation” to tenants, removing them from land that will then sit idle. Kelly (1998) cited that after a few years in such a state, the owner can claim that the land is “non-productive” and therefore eligible for conversion.
Thirdly, there have been reports that some irrigation canals are being destroyed and filled so that regulations on land conversion do not apply. This practice was condemned by the then Agrarian Reform Secretary Ernesto Garilao. In July 1997, he called on the National Irrigation Authority (NIA) to stop certifying irrigated areas as unproductive lands.
Finally, local officials have also redefined lands as zoned for non-agricultural use even when farmers are still cultivating and enriching the areas. This happened in an island in Nasugbu, Batangas and Barangay Lumot in Cavinti, Laguna in the late 90s. Rice, corn, and pineapple plantations were converted into golf courses and resorts which forced the farmers to join activist groups to fight for the lands that they were cultivating.
Communication for Social Change and Social Mobilization
Development Communication, Participatory Communication, and Social Change
Change in a social system is often engendered by communication. Communication takes place when people and the communities create messages for the purpose of changing behaviors and attitudes, elevating awareness and understanding of community issues, creating social consciousness, and fostering a shared sense of responsibility for improving the lives of people and communities (Rockefeller Foundation, 1997).
Communication opens the door for change. It is inherent in every society, be it a small or big community. It is part of many decisions, traditions, and beliefs that, when all are taken into account, constitute social change. It drives a group or person into doing something that she or he might not have done if no one has told her or him to do it. Communication, in short, is the “process by which individuals interact and influence each other” (Craig, 1999).
Other social scientists have underscored the importance of communication in changing the social order.
‘Communication’ is the basic term with which to describe the phenomena of social order and social change…Social change is neither the result of an unconsidered adaptation to the environment nor the development of an autonomous mind. Forms of social change and social order are, on the contrary, the other side of the communicative process. (Cooley et al, 2006).
Development communication is being widely used today as a concept and tool to bring about social development through democratic mechanisms. It entails the transformation of a society “from a state of poverty to one of dynamic socio-economic growth to bring about greater social equity” (Quebral, 2008). Communication is now used as a tool in creating a harmonious social environment where each is given the social justice accordingly.
However, there have been criticisms leveled against this concept of development communication. Melkote (2006) wrote:
“Most approaches, including the participatory model, have been essentially old wine in new bottles… This is an issue of power. Unless we are willing to recognize this and act on it, our work will either be ineffective or superficial, functioning as temporary band-aids for far larger problems. If development communication is to continue to play an effective role in social change processes, researchers and practitioners must address fundamental problems of unequal power relations.”
Wilkins (1999) also gave his misgivings over participatory communication, to wit:
“Although the practice of participatory communication has stressed collaboration and co-equal knowledge sharing between the (local) people and experts, and the local context and cultural proximity, the outcome in most cases has not been true empowerment of the people, but the attainment of some indicators of development as articulated in the modernization paradigm. Thus, participatory approaches have been encouraged, though the design and control of messages and development agendas usually have remained with experts. Also, issues of power and control by the authorities, structures of dependency, and power inequities have not been addressed adequately within third world settings.
Szecsko (1986) also asserted that democratization must go hand in hand with development communication.
“Democratization and development communication cannot be separated, at least not on a conceptual level. If a society’s development goals are set through democratic mechanisms, the democratization of communication, transcending legal structures, could be one concrete form of identification with the prospects of the society, reflected in the macro-structures of the communication system and even in the micro-structure of the content communicated.”
Unequal power relations continue to prevail in the participatory communication setting. And unless we can address this problem, the roots of the social problems cannot be resolved. If social change is the aim of participatory communication, it must be resolved through using a better process to communicate with the people – a kind of communication that can bring about social change; where it seeks to empower rather than to persuade people; and fosters debate among and between citizens, among and between communities, and between people and government (Communication for Social Change Forum, 2003).
Communication for Community Organizing and Social Mobilization
The simplest meaning of community organizing or CO may be summed up as a process by which people living in proximity to each other are brought together in an organization to act in their common self interest.
Elaborating on this definition, CO is the process of helping people recognize and cultivate their own power, in order to influence decisions that directly impact their community. Community organizing creates a mutually empowering space for people to realize how to get what they want through their combined knowledge, experiences, and skills (http://www.energyjustice.net, March 2009).” In the context of livable communities @ work, community organizing was defined as “a social change model that has the potential to bring enormous people power to bear on issues of regional inequity and sprawl” (http://www.fundersnetwork.org, March 2009).
One of CO’s core goals is to generate durable power for an organization representing the community, allowing it to influence key decision-makers on a range of issues over time. According to Bobo et al. (2001), this can secure community organizing groups a place at the table before important decisions are made.
Unlike other forms of more consensual "community building", community organizers generally assume that social change necessarily involves conflict and social struggle in order to generate collective power for the powerless.
The basis for social mobilization is individuals and community groups coming together to discuss their situations, to get a sense of what they can do for themselves to improve their situation. When the community decides what it can do in the process, the empowerment has started to take place. Valdecanas et al. (1996) stated that community organizing is the basic goal of social mobilization.
Social mobilization requires many levels of involvement from individual to community to policy and legislative action for sustainable social and behavioral change. Without the collective action, the same impact cannot be thoroughly achieved. Thus,
“…advocacy to mobilize resources and effect policy change, media and special events to raise public awareness, partnership building and networking, and community participation are all key strategies of social mobilization. Specific activities include group and community meetings, partnership sessions, school activities, traditional media, music, song and dance, road shows, community drama, leaflets, posters, pamphlets, videos, and home visits” (http://www.emro.who.int, 2006).
Valdecanas asserted that in order to further understand social mobilization, one must start with the awareness and understanding of the development environment – socio-cultural, economic and political. In measuring its success, it must demonstrate visible and tangible elements – policy advocacy, community organizing, program support information, education and communication, capacity building, participative management, alliance building and networking, and monitoring and evaluation.
The Department of Health in the Philippines (1992) enumerates these basic methods and steps in community organizing to bring about behavior change in health issues.
1. Fact finding. Factual information serves to identify needs, determine the extent to which needs are met, and make known gaps and overlaps in existing services.
2. Determination of needs. Once the facts are assembled, the organizer helps to define community problems and decide which problems warrant concerted community action.
3. Program formation. When a problem has been selected for action, a concrete proposal must be developed containing general and specific objectives.
4. Education and interpretation. All the above steps are of little value if they do not lead to action that will benefit the community. The fourth step then is to interpret and educate the public concerned to support the proposed program.
Key leaders from different organizations use different communication approaches and strategies to encourage the masses to participate in their organizations. These combined methods, messages, and approaches are used together with the aim to achieve the communication objectives in the context of social marketing and mobilization programs (Asfifi and French, Nd, as cited by Velasco et al., 1999).
Social marketing and mobilization use communication approaches as their strategy to mobilize the people form their social ideas. Velasco et al. (1999) cited the most commonly used approaches such as informing, whereby the new social idea is introduced and made familiar; educating, where the same idea is explained including its strengths and weaknesses; persuading, where the audience is appealed to and would accept the new idea or product; entertaining, where the audience is drawn to this new idea; and motivating, whereby the new idea provides the audience something that causes them to act.
Effects of Community Organizing on Behavior Change
Behavior change is one key component of community organizing. In the context of health programs, Prochaska and Vilicer (1997 as cited by Lefebvre, 2000) enumerated six specific stages of behavior change:
Raising consciousness: increases awareness of the causes, consequences, and cures for a problem behavior. Feedback, education, confrontation and media campaigns are possible intervention modalities.
Self-reevaluation: uses assessments of one’s self-image with and without a particular unhealthy behavior. Value clarification, healthy role models and imagery techniques can help people to be more evaluative.
Social liberation: increases the social opportunities or alternatives especially for people already relatively deprived or oppressed. Advocacy, empowerment techniques, and policy changes are procedures that can be used to meet these goals.
Helping relationships: combines caring, trust, openness, acceptance, and support for health behavior change. Strategies such as relationship building, counselor calls, and buddy systems can be sources for such support.
Persuasive communication influences behavior. It is specifically concerned with persuasion through communication—with deliberate attempts to make people change their attitudes, beliefs, values, and actions of those around them. Persuasive communication is most specially used by political organizations to influence people on their own political propaganda (Bettinghaus, 1973).
Membership in an organization may also be an outcome of the communication strategies. The psychological satisfaction of an individual is one reason why one would join and stay in an organization. Sometimes, a social organization can respond to the psychological needs that some lobbyists look for. It is not just about personal or ideological conviction, but possibly emotional fulfillment they derive from joining the organization. The message a person receives from the other members could encourage or discourage her or him in the organization.
Hence, it is possible that individuals join organizations not just to preserve the interests of the other members of society or to fight for something they believe in, but also to fulfill their own emotional needs as well. Political ideology can thus be embraced by someone through the fulfillment of his needs; after all, people would struggle to push for their own interests.
The preservation of individual interest is inherent to any society. The interests would of course depend upon the social class of individuals and their own experiences. “To study communication then is to study the constitution of human experiences – how personal meanings are produced in social interactions – rather than to simply investigate their expression and impact” (Deetz, 1999).
Communication Strategies for Social Change
Non-government organizations or NGOs employ community organizing strategies to push their advocacies. As the umbrella organization of PUMALAG, the Kilusan ng mga Magsasaka sa Pilipinas (KMP or the Peasant Movement of the Philippines) undertakes different activities to accomplish its aims. The organization carries out organizing and education work among the peasantry to build a strong and mass-based organization. It employs various forms of struggle ranging from simple court actions and lobbying work to mass mobilization efforts such as nationwide strikes and protest actions (Peasant Movement of the Philippines primer, 2008).
KMP engages in tactical alliance with other sectors of society especially the workers, national minorities, students, and progressive sections of the middle class in generating popular opposition to the government's anti-people policies and programs.
KMP also struggles for tactical and temporary reforms that bring economic relief to the people through programs and projects that contribute to actual socio-economic upliftment of the peasant class such as livelihood, health, disaster relief, cooperative-building and technology development projects (Peasant Movement of the Philippines primer, 2008). These activities are likewise used as instruments to further help KMP in organizing the community.
Key leaders from different organizations use different communication approaches and strategies to encourage the masses to join their organizations or participate in their activities. These combined methods, messages, and approaches achieve the communication objectives in the context of social marketing and mobilization programs (Asfifi and French, No Date, as cited by Velasco et al., 1999).
Messages
Messages are information that are transferred from one person or group to another which would likely produce an effect – an effect where a comprehensible information would lead to some change like increased awareness or adopting a practice (Kamlongera and Mefalopulos, 2004).
A two-step process is needed to create effective communication messages. The first involves “getting the right message” where changing attitudes and beliefs would require understanding how people can be motivated to try to change behavior or to initiate an intermediate behavior. This process, if it is to be done well, would need the use of research methods such as in-depth interviews with key stakeholders and focus groups with the target audience or respondents (Egger et al, 1993, in Bonzo et al., 2007).
Changing the attitudes and beliefs of the target audiences, especially the farmers, is a hard task. They are not easily persuaded by any individual or group who would try to change their behavior. When their cultural norms are already set, it is hard for the farmers to change these norms. Individuals who are tasked to motivate the farmers must consider their social norms for them to send the right messages to them. It usually takes the right contents of the message in order for this audience to believe and follow the messages communicated to them.
The second process involves “getting the message right” which would mean using the alternative ways of communicating with the identified motivators, other than the conventional means of communication which most target audiences are now tired of (Egger et al, 1993, in Bonzo et al, 2007). In this case, motivation is a requirement to encourage the stakeholders to join and participate in a program.
The more persuasive ways of creating messages are laid down in the following guidelines as outlined by Mefalopulos and Kamlongera (2004):
Stress one major idea;
Describe or sketch the preliminary illustrations or story lines;
Write down the theme lines/statements and the key words that express the ideas or information to be conveyed by the message;
Offer benefits and practical solutions that meet the needs of the audience;
Emphasize those features of the idea or innovation that satisfy audience’s needs;
Keep messages clear, simple, lean and tight; tell the whole story and when you have finished, stop; and
Ensure that the message is comprehensible.
Berlo, as cited by Flor and Ongkiko (1998), explained that communication does not transmit meanings. Meanings are in people – the sender and the receiver – not in the messages themselves.
Channels
Berlo (1961) defined communication channels as the modes of encoding and decoding messages. Some examples of channels are sound waves, (or message-vehicles), air (or vehicle-carrier), radio, television or other forms of media such as newspapers, bulletins, pamphlets, leaflets, and street performances.
Berlo further explained that the use of channels depends both upon the sender and the receiver of the message. People choose their own channels with some considerations such as its cost and its potential effect or impact on the recipient community. Channels are also chosen according to which one(s) would be more useful to the purpose of the source, or according to how adaptable they are to the content of the message.
Radio may seem to be the most widely used channel of communication, especially in the rural areas because it is relatively cheap and people have wider access to it. Radio is basically used to inform, educate and entertain. As for development projects, Mefalopulos and Kamlongera stated:
“Radio can be multi-faceted as, among other things, it can serve to pass messages, improve the capability of calling upon and organizing groups and organizations, enlarge the forum for social dialogue, provide effective capacity building of the community, raise awareness and knowledge of community issues, bring the people’s voice to the higher levels of their political structure and mobilize the community to tackle issues of collective interest. Radio production requirements and formats can be adapted to specific use and objectives.”
Especially in rural areas, the church may also play a big role in narrowing the gap of communication among its constituents; religious elders are the strongest base of influence in rural communities. The market is also one good channel where people could gather information about the issues surrounding them, as well as community meetings (http://www.rollbackmalaria.org, accessed 2009).
Approaches
The success of community organizing also relies heavily on the approach that the organizers use to communicate with the people. Changes do not occur overnight, hence it would take a deeper understanding of the people’s social environment and using the right approach to create changes in them.
Some development projects fail when they focus on individual behaviors, while social norms, policies, culture and a supportive environment should also be given equal importance. The community organizers should also do away from designing, testing and delivering messages such as political and unnecessary speeches which only tire the people. Instead, they should support a dialogue and debate on the key issues of concern to the community (http://www.comminit.com, accessed March 2009). Instead of using people as the objects for change, they should be the agents of their own change.
Most farmers, especially in communities where people strongly believe that they have scientific practices too, do not accept the technical know-how of the other people who do not belong to their community. The development practitioners, therefore, should do away from simply conveying information from technical experts or scientists, and instead they should sensitively place that information into the dialogue and debate. The people most affected by the issues of concern in the community should play a central role in facilitating developments to their community (http://www.comminit.com, accessed March 2009).
Persuasion does not always succeed especially when one is trying to convince people to do something. If persuasion fails, there can be no relationship that could have been created. A negotiation is the best way in a partnership. This way, negotiating with the local people would be more effective (http://www.comminit.com, accessed March 2009).
The use of educational discussions and entertainment can be likewise effective approaches in communicating with people in the community. Educational discussions can be a good venue where the people can learn more about issues that confront them, while sharing their own personal issues. Stage plays and other visual arts that are more entertaining in nature can encourage people to join a cause because they have a strong appeal
Related Studies on Communication Strategies
In the Philippines, studies have been made tracing the roots of community organizing as having started during the Spanish regime when the katipuneros armed themselves against the Spaniards. The most remarkable modern community organizing activities were during the Marcos era, most particularly in the event of the declaration of martial law in 1972 (www.comultiversity.org.ph, accessed March 2009).
Various research studies in the College of Development Communication have shown how communication has played a role in CO activities. In the study of Ik-Bae (2003) regarding the protests of the residents of Taguig, Metro Manila against a dike project, community organizing was developed through the following steps:
1. identification of the community’s sources of information regarding the dike project;
2. tracing the decisions and actions taken by the community on the project;
3. identification and analysis of the communication strategies employed in mobilizing the community through an established organization’s campaign against the project, and
4. determination of the outcomes of the communication strategies concerning the organization in terms of the people’s perceived level of environmental awareness, leverage with authority, and level of empowerment.
Ik-Bae identified advocacy, core group formation/organizing, capability building, alliance and networking, and monitoring and evaluation as the communication strategies employed in social mobilizations related to the protests against the dike project.
Although results of the study showed that the social mobilization activities conducted were not able to stop the said project, they nevertheless had positive outcomes. Ik-Bae noted that the social mobilization efforts were able to raise the environmental awareness of the Taguig residents and who also learned how to negotiate with government authorities when they gained competence and confidence through participatory development activities.
However, Ik-bae also noted that the social mobilizations also led to some negative results. For example, it brought about the emergence of illegal transactions between some of their peers and government officers, harassment of some of their leaders, and demoralization of some members, especially when they were not able to stop the project.
Kay’s (2008) study on the other hand dealt with the conflicts in the resettlement of villages in the construction of Highway One in Cambodia. He made use of focus group discussions (FGDs), participant observation, and documents analysis to determine the communication and facilitation processes involved in the issue. He showed the flow of information among, and the messages and communication channels preferred by the different stakeholders. Kay likewise showed the different communication approaches that were used by the community organizers.
Kay found that greater mutual understanding toward conflict resolution can be promoted through open communication and effective facilitation processes (of NGOs). Through these processes, the study discovered that some conflicts around resettlement policy, community participation, and compensation for the residents affected by the project were resolved.
Past studies have focused mainly on urban poor community projects by government and private corporations which could greatly affect poor residents. Or in the rural areas – farmlands where residents live within the poverty line, own no land, and are marginalized from the legal complexities of the issues confronting them and their livelihoods.
The common CO strategies used as shown by studies of NGOs include the following: distribution of leaflets and other reading materials by the organizers; conducting educational discussions and/or mini-seminars to enlighten those affected by the issue; and, FGDs to provide a more informal educational discussion.
The studies reveal that the approach used is basically to use the language or level of understanding of that particular community. By use of language, this means that those common terms in that area are used along with their common usage. As to the level of understanding, complex words are thoroughly explained using the former as its gauge.
Persuasion remains to be the key element to achieve the main goal of these CO activities. Persuasion means that the people can be made to understand and support the advocacies being fought for by the community organizers.
Analytical Framework of the Study
The analytical framework of this study has been derived from the principles of persuasive communication, the Elaboration Likelihood Model, and behavior change model.
Although this author does not quite agree that “communication can help overcome all forms of inequality and injustice that give rise to conflict and violence (http://www.waccglobal.org, accessed February 2009)”, she believes that communication can help address these issues to reduce the conflicts. She concurs with Littlejohn and Foss’s view (2005) that communication is an instrumental tool for social organizing, and that it can be a medium that can be used to respond to social problems of the community.
Persuasive communication – or simply persuasion – on the other hand, involves the presentation of strong arguments over weak ones, and processes involving repetition of facts. Previous researches suggest that message argument scrutiny is enhanced by moderate levels of message repetition, whereas tedium develops at high levels of message repetition. Such a conceptualization implies that strong messages would only need a moderate level of message repetition for the audience to fully grasp the contents of the messages being sent to them (Erlbaum, 1989).
Analyses also revealed the predicted interaction on the measure of post- communication attitudes, providing convergent evidence that moderate levels of message repetition can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing argument scrutiny (Cacioppo and Petty, 1979)
Meanwhile, attitude change occurs whenever there is sufficient incentive for the person to learn and accept whatever the source asserts (Hovland et al., 1953).
Specifically, a persuasive argument offered in support of some advocated position could point to a good consequence that is likely to occur if the advocated position is adopted, or a bad consequence that is likely to occur if the advocated position is not adopted (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1973).
The last theory used in this study is the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) developed by Petty, Cacioppo, and their collaborators (1979), wherein a “dual process” approach to persuasion occurs. The model shows that people accept (or reject) assertions based on simple cues primarily when they are relatively unmotivated or unable to think about the arguments provided (Chaiken, 1987). The important variations in the nature of persuasion play the determining factor whether or not the receivers will accept the information given by the opposing sides. It involves two different kinds of persuasion processes – one involving systematic thinking (central route) and the other involving cognitive shortcuts (peripheral route).
Peasants can be influenced by the government or the community organizers depending upon which process is activated (O’Keefe, n.d., as cited by Donsbach, 2008). In the same manner, the degree of persuasion can also be dependent upon the person who has more authority to encourage (or discourage) the people. A town mayor can influence a big part of the population only because of the position that s/he holds in the community. In the same way, a peasant leader known for her or his dedication to the community can have the same persuasive power as the mayor.
On the other hand, when the motivation and ability to think about the assertion are high, people scrutinize the available arguments in an active fashion, accepting the advocacy only if the arguments are found to be compelling, and rejecting the assertion if the arguments are found to be weak (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986). The burden of acceptance lies in the degree that the government and, in this case, the PUMALAG and MNKKB can enhance their own persuasive arguments and therefore increase the peasants’ motivation to accept the position they are advocating for.
Conceptual Framework of the Study
The research sought to determine the communication strategies of the PUMALAG and MNKKB in terms of the messages they shared, the types of communication channels they used, and the approaches they employed among the farmers in the Fourth District of Laguna.
Effective communication strategies can increase the community’s awareness and knowledge of the issues pertaining to the government projects that directly affect their livelihoods; change their attitudes toward the projects and toward their own participation as manifested by stronger social ties and a sense of responsibility to act to mitigate the effects of such projects in their community; and change their behavior as shown by their active involvement in activities to resist (or support, as the case may be) such projects.
Effective communication can also lead to social mobilization – which involves aligning all stakeholders or key players in facilitating a process where people could critically analyze the issues affecting them and demand for a particular program, resources, or services from the government or its agencies
d
Operational Definition of Terms
Communication strategy – the use of appropriate messages, communication channels, and approaches to persuade people in the community to critically analyze issues that affect them and join in advocacies for change or resistance as appropriate
Messages – the information or basic ideas shared by the PUMALAG and MNKKB about the two government development projects in the Fourth District of Laguna to the farmers that served as ‘rallying points’ for their (farmers) action
Channels – the medium wherein the PUMALAG and MNKKB shared these information to the community – through mass media, group media, interpersonal media, or information, education, and communication (IEC) materials
Approaches – the style of presentation of the messages to the people, whether informing, educating, or persuading/motivating
Community Organizing – the process of raising the awareness and changing the attitude and behavior of the peasant communities through communication strategies toward the two development projects earlier mentioned. This involved increased knowledge about the issues; a change in attitude toward the issue and toward their participation; and change in behavior as manifested in their participation in specific actions to resist such projects or mitigate their negative effects on the community
Peasants – farmers, and farm workers whose livelihoods are dependent on agriculture. In this study, the term particularly refers to farmers who tilled lands near or around the Laguna Lake and also local people who fished in the lake. These groups are mostly residents of the barangays (villages) of Banilan, Dambo, San Jose, Mabato-Azufre, Sulib, Galalan in upper and lower Pangil, Bagumbayan in Paete, Banilan, Casa Real, Casinsin, Kabulusan, Tavera in Pakil, and Longos in Kalayaan, all in the Fourth District of Laguna. Some of these peasants are landless, others are cultivating their own lands which they received as CARP beneficiaries, while some have lost their farm lands (as a result of the government projects).
Social mobilization – the process of bringing together all feasible and practical intersectoral allies to raise awareness of and demand for a particular program, to assist in the delivery of resources and services and to strengthen community participation to bring about social change (Ik-Bae, 2008).
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
Design of the Study
This research used the case studies of two government projects – the Pangil River Dam and the Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure projects – in the Fourth District of Laguna and how these affected the peasant communities in the district. Data were gathered in various barangays in the said district from August 15 to 24, 2008, with data verification on various dates in September of the same year, and validation of some facts in March 26, 2009.
Respondents and Sampling
Three community organizers from PUMALAG were purposively selected to narrate their stories regarding the Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure and other peasant problems in the Fourth District’ the effects of the structure on the peasant communities; and the communication strategies they used to organize the peasants in these communities.
Two key leaders of the MNKKB were also purposively selected to shed light on the social mobilization strategies and processes in organizing and mobilizing the residents of lower Pangil, as well as residents of other municipalities, other sectors such as students, skilled workers, women, and church leaders who were against the dam project.
With the guidance of the said organizers and leaders of the two farmers’ groups, peasant-respondents from the towns of Pakil, Paete, upper and lower Pangil, and Kalayaan were contacted to take part in the focus group discussions (FGDs). The researcher identified the farmer-respondents based on the recommendation of the PUMALAG organizers. These respondents, in turn, recommended other farmers for more FGDs. Hence, a snowball sampling was used; 15 respondents joined these FGDs.
Meanwhile, to hear the voice of the government project developers, the three municipal agricultural officers (MAOs) of Pakil, Paete, and Pangil were purposively chosen to explain particulars about the Napindan Channel and other issues related to the project.
Data Gathering Instruments and Methods
A combination of several data gathering methods was employed in this study.
Key informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted with the MAOs, PUMALAG community organizers, and MNKKB key leaders to discuss the problems of the peasants in the Fourth District as well as the historical background of agrarian problems in the community, especially the case of the Napindan channel and dam projects in Pangil. The key informants from PUMALAG and MNKKB were also asked about the communication strategies (in terms of message, channels, and approaches used) they employed in organizing and mobilizing the local residents.
FGDs were used with the farmers to determine the effects of the communication strategies employed by the PUMALAG and MNKKB in organizing the communities to act on these projects.
The researcher conducted direct observation by staying in the communities for about a month and by visiting them at various intervals.
Secondary data were gathered by reviewing back issues of magazines, newspapers, and municipal and court petition papers.
Data analysis
The key informant interviews, FGDs, and observations yielded mostly narratives or story forms. Hence, this study is a collection of the written and verbal stories of the groups of farmers and fisher folks, three municipal agriculture officers, and three peasant organizers and leaders in the local communities in the Fourth District of Laguna as well as the researcher’s personal observations.
These stories together with those gathered from secondary sources were presented in descriptive and narrative forms. Hence, analysis of the data is primarily based on the subjective views of the respondents and of the researcher.
The agrarian situation in the Philippines shows the intertwined story of feudalism and peasants’ struggle to reclaim the land brought about by the various government schemes that resulted in more landless farmers – examples of which are outlined below.
The World Bank prescribed three agricultural policies for the Philippine government as follows: first, is the involvement of the “quasi-public aid” to formulate the macro-economic policies as part of the conditions of their loans; second, is “international trade” or more popularly known as the free trade policy; and third, are the presence of multinational corporations (TNCs) that have increasingly shaped the development of international agricultural production in many parts of the globe (Fortin , 2005).
When former President Ferdinand Marcos was ousted in 1986, the agrarian sector hoped that the administration of Corazon Aquino would give farmers the opportunity to finally own the lands that they were cultivating. Ironically, as already mentioned, it was during this era that the “Mendiola Massacre” occurred.
The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) which was passed into law during Aquino’s term aimed to complete the acquisition and distribution of the 1.6 million hectares of private and public alienable agricultural lands to agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs); transform these ARBs into empowered, responsible, and progressive new breeds of owner-cultivators and entrepreneurs that would contribute significantly to national economic growth and development; and deliver fair and just agrarian justice. It also aimed to provide just compensation to dispossessed land owners and legal assistance for affected agrarian reform farmers (Department of Agrarian Reform primer, 2008).
More than 20 years have passed since the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of 1988 was enacted into law by the Congress of the Philippines. This is considered a huge failure for many landless peasants because it failed to address the root problem of raising the quality of life of the farmers and peasants (http://www.bulatlat.com, accessed 2007). The program, according to Riedinger (1995), failed to implement the more controversial and costly elements of the reform policy. Simply put, land transfer could be costly for the farmers who could not even afford to pay a lawyer to title their lands, while handling such titled lands could also be hard for most farmers.
In the succeeding years, the government passed such a bewildering and vague variety of agrarian-related programs, laws, administrative orders, memoranda, and legal precedents that it became easier for the landowners, along with the concerned government agencies, to circumvent the provisions and original intentions of the CARL.
The passing of Republic Act of 8435, otherwise known as the Agricultural and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA) of 1997, further worsened the situation of farmers and fisher folks. Despite the promises of agricultural glory by the then President Joseph Estrada in his Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan, AFMA, along with Estrada’s other land reform programs, was considered a big failure by different peasant movements, (Ramos, 2000). Landowners have also developed schemes such as land conversion in order to circumvent the government’s agrarian reform program (Kelly, 1998).
The joint venture arrangement, also known as “cooperative scheme,” was resorted to by some landlords to overrule the CARP. The most famous of them was Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco, a known crony of Marcos, and one of the biggest landlords in the country. Cojuangco’s scheme for the program was met with criticisms by peasant organizations when he negotiated the arrangement with coconut farmers. Cojuangco created a cooperative wherein he was the major stockholder. All the farmer-beneficiaries were forced to be members of the cooperative, and they had to give up their land titles for that scheme. This intensified the anger of coconut farmers who then launched a series of local and national protests. The Pambansang Koalisyon ng mga Samahan ng mga Magsasaka at Manggagawa sa Niyugan (PKSMMN), a national coalition of 30 small coconut organizations with a membership of 350,000 small coconut farmers nationwide, denounced it (http://www.philsol, December 2008).
Laguna: A Microcosm of the Land Reform Problem
Laguna experienced the same peasant struggles in land reform as that of other regions occupied by the Spaniards. In 1577, the Franciscan missionaries arrived in Manila. Thereafter, they started evangelizing people in Laguna as they did in other parts of the country. Like the Augustinian priests, they helped organize the government. During this period, the King of Spain awarded tracts of land to some families in its dominion called encomiendas. This system entitled the encomiendero, the recipient, to collect tributes from the natives. Since then, the chosen clans have been able to secure ownership of a big percentage of land in the province (http://www.laguna.gov.ph, September 2008).
The hacienda system was also implemented in various parts of Laguna. The colonial government in 1689 declared Santa Rosa, Binan and Calamba, all barrios of Cabuyao – as haciendas. Land was either awarded to influential loyal subjects of the king, or sold through auction to religious orders. Rice and sugarcane were grown in these haciendas.
From 1887 to 1892, the hacienda became a subject of controversies. Misunderstandings ensued between the administration and the tenants regarding unreasonable land levies. One such dispute involved Rizal’s father, Francisco Mercado, a “tenant” of the Dominican friars who were the landlords of the hacienda.
Dr. Jose Rizal, a native of Calamba, who was then in Madrid, advocated the cause of the Filipino farmers in his homeland and fought for their rights in the courts of Spain. Rizal amplified the issues through his propaganda activities and his two novels, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. Both books portrayed the social ills that perturbed the Philippines under Spanish rule. Such advocacy led to the prosecution of Rizal’s family and friends. The Spanish government later deported Rizal to Dapitan in the southern part of the Philippines and ultimately executed him in Bagumbayan (now Luneta Park). His execution helped spark the violent revolution against the Spanish colonizers of 1896 led by Andres Bonifacio and Emilio Aguinaldo.
When the Americans occupied Laguna in the early 1900s, most of the local inhabitants were freed from the encomienderos, and given the right to own the lands they tilled (http://www.laguna.gov.ph, September 2008).
At present, about 126,662 of the 175,973 hectares total land area in Laguna (72%) have been classified and certified either as alienable and disposable and 49,311 hectares (38%) as forest lands (http://www.laguna.gov.ph, accessed September, 2008).
Data from the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) shows that Region IV, where Laguna is included, has the most number of approved plans for land use conversion. This may be termed as “regional urbanization” wherein people from the rural areas are forced to live in towns. The supposedly fertile lands for rice, corn, and other crops have been converted to a variety of urban and industrial uses: export processing zones and industrial estates; institutions such as hospitals and universities; leisure landscapes such as golf courses, resorts and theme parks; and, most significantly in terms of the area involved, residential subdivisions (Kelly, 1998).
Table 1. Approved lands for conversion in the Philippines, 1995
Region Approved Disapproved * Exempted ** Total
CAR 38 0 9 47
I 70 2 0 72
II 166 7 26 198
III 2,223 348 703 3,274
IV 7,029 305 13,022 20,358
V 178 59 45 281
VI 1,325 227 431 1,984
VII 208 164 6 378
VIII 76 90 302 468
IX 241 0 38 279
X 913 201 2,576 3,690
XI 1,971 217 99 2,286
XII 300 0 92 393
14,739 1,619 17,348 33,707
Source: Unpublished data from DAR, Quezon City, July 1995.
* Disapproved for conversion but converted anyway
** Exempted through Department of Justice Opinion 44. Exemption figures are updated only to July 1994.
Various other land conversion strategies are being employed so as not to implement the agrarian reform program in Laguna. In Batangas, Cavite, and Laguna, the DENR and the provincial governments have allowed land developers to convert rice fields into industrial areas, resorts, and golf courses, especially during the 1990s. Laguna now has 18 industrial parks, offering various opportunities for jobs and enterprises and yielding various products ranging from foodstuffs, handicrafts, semi-conductors, home appliances, and automobiles.
Another common strategy is keeping the land idle. Landlords can simply pay “disturbance compensation” to tenants, removing them from land that will then sit idle. Kelly (1998) cited that after a few years in such a state, the owner can claim that the land is “non-productive” and therefore eligible for conversion.
Thirdly, there have been reports that some irrigation canals are being destroyed and filled so that regulations on land conversion do not apply. This practice was condemned by the then Agrarian Reform Secretary Ernesto Garilao. In July 1997, he called on the National Irrigation Authority (NIA) to stop certifying irrigated areas as unproductive lands.
Finally, local officials have also redefined lands as zoned for non-agricultural use even when farmers are still cultivating and enriching the areas. This happened in an island in Nasugbu, Batangas and Barangay Lumot in Cavinti, Laguna in the late 90s. Rice, corn, and pineapple plantations were converted into golf courses and resorts which forced the farmers to join activist groups to fight for the lands that they were cultivating.
Communication for Social Change and Social Mobilization
Development Communication, Participatory Communication, and Social Change
Change in a social system is often engendered by communication. Communication takes place when people and the communities create messages for the purpose of changing behaviors and attitudes, elevating awareness and understanding of community issues, creating social consciousness, and fostering a shared sense of responsibility for improving the lives of people and communities (Rockefeller Foundation, 1997).
Communication opens the door for change. It is inherent in every society, be it a small or big community. It is part of many decisions, traditions, and beliefs that, when all are taken into account, constitute social change. It drives a group or person into doing something that she or he might not have done if no one has told her or him to do it. Communication, in short, is the “process by which individuals interact and influence each other” (Craig, 1999).
Other social scientists have underscored the importance of communication in changing the social order.
‘Communication’ is the basic term with which to describe the phenomena of social order and social change…Social change is neither the result of an unconsidered adaptation to the environment nor the development of an autonomous mind. Forms of social change and social order are, on the contrary, the other side of the communicative process. (Cooley et al, 2006).
Development communication is being widely used today as a concept and tool to bring about social development through democratic mechanisms. It entails the transformation of a society “from a state of poverty to one of dynamic socio-economic growth to bring about greater social equity” (Quebral, 2008). Communication is now used as a tool in creating a harmonious social environment where each is given the social justice accordingly.
However, there have been criticisms leveled against this concept of development communication. Melkote (2006) wrote:
“Most approaches, including the participatory model, have been essentially old wine in new bottles… This is an issue of power. Unless we are willing to recognize this and act on it, our work will either be ineffective or superficial, functioning as temporary band-aids for far larger problems. If development communication is to continue to play an effective role in social change processes, researchers and practitioners must address fundamental problems of unequal power relations.”
Wilkins (1999) also gave his misgivings over participatory communication, to wit:
“Although the practice of participatory communication has stressed collaboration and co-equal knowledge sharing between the (local) people and experts, and the local context and cultural proximity, the outcome in most cases has not been true empowerment of the people, but the attainment of some indicators of development as articulated in the modernization paradigm. Thus, participatory approaches have been encouraged, though the design and control of messages and development agendas usually have remained with experts. Also, issues of power and control by the authorities, structures of dependency, and power inequities have not been addressed adequately within third world settings.
Szecsko (1986) also asserted that democratization must go hand in hand with development communication.
“Democratization and development communication cannot be separated, at least not on a conceptual level. If a society’s development goals are set through democratic mechanisms, the democratization of communication, transcending legal structures, could be one concrete form of identification with the prospects of the society, reflected in the macro-structures of the communication system and even in the micro-structure of the content communicated.”
Unequal power relations continue to prevail in the participatory communication setting. And unless we can address this problem, the roots of the social problems cannot be resolved. If social change is the aim of participatory communication, it must be resolved through using a better process to communicate with the people – a kind of communication that can bring about social change; where it seeks to empower rather than to persuade people; and fosters debate among and between citizens, among and between communities, and between people and government (Communication for Social Change Forum, 2003).
Communication for Community Organizing and Social Mobilization
The simplest meaning of community organizing or CO may be summed up as a process by which people living in proximity to each other are brought together in an organization to act in their common self interest.
Elaborating on this definition, CO is the process of helping people recognize and cultivate their own power, in order to influence decisions that directly impact their community. Community organizing creates a mutually empowering space for people to realize how to get what they want through their combined knowledge, experiences, and skills (http://www.energyjustice.net, March 2009).” In the context of livable communities @ work, community organizing was defined as “a social change model that has the potential to bring enormous people power to bear on issues of regional inequity and sprawl” (http://www.fundersnetwork.org, March 2009).
One of CO’s core goals is to generate durable power for an organization representing the community, allowing it to influence key decision-makers on a range of issues over time. According to Bobo et al. (2001), this can secure community organizing groups a place at the table before important decisions are made.
Unlike other forms of more consensual "community building", community organizers generally assume that social change necessarily involves conflict and social struggle in order to generate collective power for the powerless.
The basis for social mobilization is individuals and community groups coming together to discuss their situations, to get a sense of what they can do for themselves to improve their situation. When the community decides what it can do in the process, the empowerment has started to take place. Valdecanas et al. (1996) stated that community organizing is the basic goal of social mobilization.
Social mobilization requires many levels of involvement from individual to community to policy and legislative action for sustainable social and behavioral change. Without the collective action, the same impact cannot be thoroughly achieved. Thus,
“…advocacy to mobilize resources and effect policy change, media and special events to raise public awareness, partnership building and networking, and community participation are all key strategies of social mobilization. Specific activities include group and community meetings, partnership sessions, school activities, traditional media, music, song and dance, road shows, community drama, leaflets, posters, pamphlets, videos, and home visits” (http://www.emro.who.int, 2006).
Valdecanas asserted that in order to further understand social mobilization, one must start with the awareness and understanding of the development environment – socio-cultural, economic and political. In measuring its success, it must demonstrate visible and tangible elements – policy advocacy, community organizing, program support information, education and communication, capacity building, participative management, alliance building and networking, and monitoring and evaluation.
The Department of Health in the Philippines (1992) enumerates these basic methods and steps in community organizing to bring about behavior change in health issues.
1. Fact finding. Factual information serves to identify needs, determine the extent to which needs are met, and make known gaps and overlaps in existing services.
2. Determination of needs. Once the facts are assembled, the organizer helps to define community problems and decide which problems warrant concerted community action.
3. Program formation. When a problem has been selected for action, a concrete proposal must be developed containing general and specific objectives.
4. Education and interpretation. All the above steps are of little value if they do not lead to action that will benefit the community. The fourth step then is to interpret and educate the public concerned to support the proposed program.
Key leaders from different organizations use different communication approaches and strategies to encourage the masses to participate in their organizations. These combined methods, messages, and approaches are used together with the aim to achieve the communication objectives in the context of social marketing and mobilization programs (Asfifi and French, Nd, as cited by Velasco et al., 1999).
Social marketing and mobilization use communication approaches as their strategy to mobilize the people form their social ideas. Velasco et al. (1999) cited the most commonly used approaches such as informing, whereby the new social idea is introduced and made familiar; educating, where the same idea is explained including its strengths and weaknesses; persuading, where the audience is appealed to and would accept the new idea or product; entertaining, where the audience is drawn to this new idea; and motivating, whereby the new idea provides the audience something that causes them to act.
Effects of Community Organizing on Behavior Change
Behavior change is one key component of community organizing. In the context of health programs, Prochaska and Vilicer (1997 as cited by Lefebvre, 2000) enumerated six specific stages of behavior change:
Raising consciousness: increases awareness of the causes, consequences, and cures for a problem behavior. Feedback, education, confrontation and media campaigns are possible intervention modalities.
Self-reevaluation: uses assessments of one’s self-image with and without a particular unhealthy behavior. Value clarification, healthy role models and imagery techniques can help people to be more evaluative.
Social liberation: increases the social opportunities or alternatives especially for people already relatively deprived or oppressed. Advocacy, empowerment techniques, and policy changes are procedures that can be used to meet these goals.
Helping relationships: combines caring, trust, openness, acceptance, and support for health behavior change. Strategies such as relationship building, counselor calls, and buddy systems can be sources for such support.
Persuasive communication influences behavior. It is specifically concerned with persuasion through communication—with deliberate attempts to make people change their attitudes, beliefs, values, and actions of those around them. Persuasive communication is most specially used by political organizations to influence people on their own political propaganda (Bettinghaus, 1973).
Membership in an organization may also be an outcome of the communication strategies. The psychological satisfaction of an individual is one reason why one would join and stay in an organization. Sometimes, a social organization can respond to the psychological needs that some lobbyists look for. It is not just about personal or ideological conviction, but possibly emotional fulfillment they derive from joining the organization. The message a person receives from the other members could encourage or discourage her or him in the organization.
Hence, it is possible that individuals join organizations not just to preserve the interests of the other members of society or to fight for something they believe in, but also to fulfill their own emotional needs as well. Political ideology can thus be embraced by someone through the fulfillment of his needs; after all, people would struggle to push for their own interests.
The preservation of individual interest is inherent to any society. The interests would of course depend upon the social class of individuals and their own experiences. “To study communication then is to study the constitution of human experiences – how personal meanings are produced in social interactions – rather than to simply investigate their expression and impact” (Deetz, 1999).
Communication Strategies for Social Change
Non-government organizations or NGOs employ community organizing strategies to push their advocacies. As the umbrella organization of PUMALAG, the Kilusan ng mga Magsasaka sa Pilipinas (KMP or the Peasant Movement of the Philippines) undertakes different activities to accomplish its aims. The organization carries out organizing and education work among the peasantry to build a strong and mass-based organization. It employs various forms of struggle ranging from simple court actions and lobbying work to mass mobilization efforts such as nationwide strikes and protest actions (Peasant Movement of the Philippines primer, 2008).
KMP engages in tactical alliance with other sectors of society especially the workers, national minorities, students, and progressive sections of the middle class in generating popular opposition to the government's anti-people policies and programs.
KMP also struggles for tactical and temporary reforms that bring economic relief to the people through programs and projects that contribute to actual socio-economic upliftment of the peasant class such as livelihood, health, disaster relief, cooperative-building and technology development projects (Peasant Movement of the Philippines primer, 2008). These activities are likewise used as instruments to further help KMP in organizing the community.
Key leaders from different organizations use different communication approaches and strategies to encourage the masses to join their organizations or participate in their activities. These combined methods, messages, and approaches achieve the communication objectives in the context of social marketing and mobilization programs (Asfifi and French, No Date, as cited by Velasco et al., 1999).
Messages
Messages are information that are transferred from one person or group to another which would likely produce an effect – an effect where a comprehensible information would lead to some change like increased awareness or adopting a practice (Kamlongera and Mefalopulos, 2004).
A two-step process is needed to create effective communication messages. The first involves “getting the right message” where changing attitudes and beliefs would require understanding how people can be motivated to try to change behavior or to initiate an intermediate behavior. This process, if it is to be done well, would need the use of research methods such as in-depth interviews with key stakeholders and focus groups with the target audience or respondents (Egger et al, 1993, in Bonzo et al., 2007).
Changing the attitudes and beliefs of the target audiences, especially the farmers, is a hard task. They are not easily persuaded by any individual or group who would try to change their behavior. When their cultural norms are already set, it is hard for the farmers to change these norms. Individuals who are tasked to motivate the farmers must consider their social norms for them to send the right messages to them. It usually takes the right contents of the message in order for this audience to believe and follow the messages communicated to them.
The second process involves “getting the message right” which would mean using the alternative ways of communicating with the identified motivators, other than the conventional means of communication which most target audiences are now tired of (Egger et al, 1993, in Bonzo et al, 2007). In this case, motivation is a requirement to encourage the stakeholders to join and participate in a program.
The more persuasive ways of creating messages are laid down in the following guidelines as outlined by Mefalopulos and Kamlongera (2004):
Stress one major idea;
Describe or sketch the preliminary illustrations or story lines;
Write down the theme lines/statements and the key words that express the ideas or information to be conveyed by the message;
Offer benefits and practical solutions that meet the needs of the audience;
Emphasize those features of the idea or innovation that satisfy audience’s needs;
Keep messages clear, simple, lean and tight; tell the whole story and when you have finished, stop; and
Ensure that the message is comprehensible.
Berlo, as cited by Flor and Ongkiko (1998), explained that communication does not transmit meanings. Meanings are in people – the sender and the receiver – not in the messages themselves.
Channels
Berlo (1961) defined communication channels as the modes of encoding and decoding messages. Some examples of channels are sound waves, (or message-vehicles), air (or vehicle-carrier), radio, television or other forms of media such as newspapers, bulletins, pamphlets, leaflets, and street performances.
Berlo further explained that the use of channels depends both upon the sender and the receiver of the message. People choose their own channels with some considerations such as its cost and its potential effect or impact on the recipient community. Channels are also chosen according to which one(s) would be more useful to the purpose of the source, or according to how adaptable they are to the content of the message.
Radio may seem to be the most widely used channel of communication, especially in the rural areas because it is relatively cheap and people have wider access to it. Radio is basically used to inform, educate and entertain. As for development projects, Mefalopulos and Kamlongera stated:
“Radio can be multi-faceted as, among other things, it can serve to pass messages, improve the capability of calling upon and organizing groups and organizations, enlarge the forum for social dialogue, provide effective capacity building of the community, raise awareness and knowledge of community issues, bring the people’s voice to the higher levels of their political structure and mobilize the community to tackle issues of collective interest. Radio production requirements and formats can be adapted to specific use and objectives.”
Especially in rural areas, the church may also play a big role in narrowing the gap of communication among its constituents; religious elders are the strongest base of influence in rural communities. The market is also one good channel where people could gather information about the issues surrounding them, as well as community meetings (http://www.rollbackmalaria.org, accessed 2009).
Approaches
The success of community organizing also relies heavily on the approach that the organizers use to communicate with the people. Changes do not occur overnight, hence it would take a deeper understanding of the people’s social environment and using the right approach to create changes in them.
Some development projects fail when they focus on individual behaviors, while social norms, policies, culture and a supportive environment should also be given equal importance. The community organizers should also do away from designing, testing and delivering messages such as political and unnecessary speeches which only tire the people. Instead, they should support a dialogue and debate on the key issues of concern to the community (http://www.comminit.com, accessed March 2009). Instead of using people as the objects for change, they should be the agents of their own change.
Most farmers, especially in communities where people strongly believe that they have scientific practices too, do not accept the technical know-how of the other people who do not belong to their community. The development practitioners, therefore, should do away from simply conveying information from technical experts or scientists, and instead they should sensitively place that information into the dialogue and debate. The people most affected by the issues of concern in the community should play a central role in facilitating developments to their community (http://www.comminit.com, accessed March 2009).
Persuasion does not always succeed especially when one is trying to convince people to do something. If persuasion fails, there can be no relationship that could have been created. A negotiation is the best way in a partnership. This way, negotiating with the local people would be more effective (http://www.comminit.com, accessed March 2009).
The use of educational discussions and entertainment can be likewise effective approaches in communicating with people in the community. Educational discussions can be a good venue where the people can learn more about issues that confront them, while sharing their own personal issues. Stage plays and other visual arts that are more entertaining in nature can encourage people to join a cause because they have a strong appeal
Related Studies on Communication Strategies
In the Philippines, studies have been made tracing the roots of community organizing as having started during the Spanish regime when the katipuneros armed themselves against the Spaniards. The most remarkable modern community organizing activities were during the Marcos era, most particularly in the event of the declaration of martial law in 1972 (www.comultiversity.org.ph, accessed March 2009).
Various research studies in the College of Development Communication have shown how communication has played a role in CO activities. In the study of Ik-Bae (2003) regarding the protests of the residents of Taguig, Metro Manila against a dike project, community organizing was developed through the following steps:
1. identification of the community’s sources of information regarding the dike project;
2. tracing the decisions and actions taken by the community on the project;
3. identification and analysis of the communication strategies employed in mobilizing the community through an established organization’s campaign against the project, and
4. determination of the outcomes of the communication strategies concerning the organization in terms of the people’s perceived level of environmental awareness, leverage with authority, and level of empowerment.
Ik-Bae identified advocacy, core group formation/organizing, capability building, alliance and networking, and monitoring and evaluation as the communication strategies employed in social mobilizations related to the protests against the dike project.
Although results of the study showed that the social mobilization activities conducted were not able to stop the said project, they nevertheless had positive outcomes. Ik-Bae noted that the social mobilization efforts were able to raise the environmental awareness of the Taguig residents and who also learned how to negotiate with government authorities when they gained competence and confidence through participatory development activities.
However, Ik-bae also noted that the social mobilizations also led to some negative results. For example, it brought about the emergence of illegal transactions between some of their peers and government officers, harassment of some of their leaders, and demoralization of some members, especially when they were not able to stop the project.
Kay’s (2008) study on the other hand dealt with the conflicts in the resettlement of villages in the construction of Highway One in Cambodia. He made use of focus group discussions (FGDs), participant observation, and documents analysis to determine the communication and facilitation processes involved in the issue. He showed the flow of information among, and the messages and communication channels preferred by the different stakeholders. Kay likewise showed the different communication approaches that were used by the community organizers.
Kay found that greater mutual understanding toward conflict resolution can be promoted through open communication and effective facilitation processes (of NGOs). Through these processes, the study discovered that some conflicts around resettlement policy, community participation, and compensation for the residents affected by the project were resolved.
Past studies have focused mainly on urban poor community projects by government and private corporations which could greatly affect poor residents. Or in the rural areas – farmlands where residents live within the poverty line, own no land, and are marginalized from the legal complexities of the issues confronting them and their livelihoods.
The common CO strategies used as shown by studies of NGOs include the following: distribution of leaflets and other reading materials by the organizers; conducting educational discussions and/or mini-seminars to enlighten those affected by the issue; and, FGDs to provide a more informal educational discussion.
The studies reveal that the approach used is basically to use the language or level of understanding of that particular community. By use of language, this means that those common terms in that area are used along with their common usage. As to the level of understanding, complex words are thoroughly explained using the former as its gauge.
Persuasion remains to be the key element to achieve the main goal of these CO activities. Persuasion means that the people can be made to understand and support the advocacies being fought for by the community organizers.
Analytical Framework of the Study
The analytical framework of this study has been derived from the principles of persuasive communication, the Elaboration Likelihood Model, and behavior change model.
Although this author does not quite agree that “communication can help overcome all forms of inequality and injustice that give rise to conflict and violence (http://www.waccglobal.org, accessed February 2009)”, she believes that communication can help address these issues to reduce the conflicts. She concurs with Littlejohn and Foss’s view (2005) that communication is an instrumental tool for social organizing, and that it can be a medium that can be used to respond to social problems of the community.
Persuasive communication – or simply persuasion – on the other hand, involves the presentation of strong arguments over weak ones, and processes involving repetition of facts. Previous researches suggest that message argument scrutiny is enhanced by moderate levels of message repetition, whereas tedium develops at high levels of message repetition. Such a conceptualization implies that strong messages would only need a moderate level of message repetition for the audience to fully grasp the contents of the messages being sent to them (Erlbaum, 1989).
Analyses also revealed the predicted interaction on the measure of post- communication attitudes, providing convergent evidence that moderate levels of message repetition can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing argument scrutiny (Cacioppo and Petty, 1979)
Meanwhile, attitude change occurs whenever there is sufficient incentive for the person to learn and accept whatever the source asserts (Hovland et al., 1953).
Specifically, a persuasive argument offered in support of some advocated position could point to a good consequence that is likely to occur if the advocated position is adopted, or a bad consequence that is likely to occur if the advocated position is not adopted (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1973).
The last theory used in this study is the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) developed by Petty, Cacioppo, and their collaborators (1979), wherein a “dual process” approach to persuasion occurs. The model shows that people accept (or reject) assertions based on simple cues primarily when they are relatively unmotivated or unable to think about the arguments provided (Chaiken, 1987). The important variations in the nature of persuasion play the determining factor whether or not the receivers will accept the information given by the opposing sides. It involves two different kinds of persuasion processes – one involving systematic thinking (central route) and the other involving cognitive shortcuts (peripheral route).
Peasants can be influenced by the government or the community organizers depending upon which process is activated (O’Keefe, n.d., as cited by Donsbach, 2008). In the same manner, the degree of persuasion can also be dependent upon the person who has more authority to encourage (or discourage) the people. A town mayor can influence a big part of the population only because of the position that s/he holds in the community. In the same way, a peasant leader known for her or his dedication to the community can have the same persuasive power as the mayor.
On the other hand, when the motivation and ability to think about the assertion are high, people scrutinize the available arguments in an active fashion, accepting the advocacy only if the arguments are found to be compelling, and rejecting the assertion if the arguments are found to be weak (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986). The burden of acceptance lies in the degree that the government and, in this case, the PUMALAG and MNKKB can enhance their own persuasive arguments and therefore increase the peasants’ motivation to accept the position they are advocating for.
Conceptual Framework of the Study
The research sought to determine the communication strategies of the PUMALAG and MNKKB in terms of the messages they shared, the types of communication channels they used, and the approaches they employed among the farmers in the Fourth District of Laguna.
Effective communication strategies can increase the community’s awareness and knowledge of the issues pertaining to the government projects that directly affect their livelihoods; change their attitudes toward the projects and toward their own participation as manifested by stronger social ties and a sense of responsibility to act to mitigate the effects of such projects in their community; and change their behavior as shown by their active involvement in activities to resist (or support, as the case may be) such projects.
Effective communication can also lead to social mobilization – which involves aligning all stakeholders or key players in facilitating a process where people could critically analyze the issues affecting them and demand for a particular program, resources, or services from the government or its agencies
d
Operational Definition of Terms
Communication strategy – the use of appropriate messages, communication channels, and approaches to persuade people in the community to critically analyze issues that affect them and join in advocacies for change or resistance as appropriate
Messages – the information or basic ideas shared by the PUMALAG and MNKKB about the two government development projects in the Fourth District of Laguna to the farmers that served as ‘rallying points’ for their (farmers) action
Channels – the medium wherein the PUMALAG and MNKKB shared these information to the community – through mass media, group media, interpersonal media, or information, education, and communication (IEC) materials
Approaches – the style of presentation of the messages to the people, whether informing, educating, or persuading/motivating
Community Organizing – the process of raising the awareness and changing the attitude and behavior of the peasant communities through communication strategies toward the two development projects earlier mentioned. This involved increased knowledge about the issues; a change in attitude toward the issue and toward their participation; and change in behavior as manifested in their participation in specific actions to resist such projects or mitigate their negative effects on the community
Peasants – farmers, and farm workers whose livelihoods are dependent on agriculture. In this study, the term particularly refers to farmers who tilled lands near or around the Laguna Lake and also local people who fished in the lake. These groups are mostly residents of the barangays (villages) of Banilan, Dambo, San Jose, Mabato-Azufre, Sulib, Galalan in upper and lower Pangil, Bagumbayan in Paete, Banilan, Casa Real, Casinsin, Kabulusan, Tavera in Pakil, and Longos in Kalayaan, all in the Fourth District of Laguna. Some of these peasants are landless, others are cultivating their own lands which they received as CARP beneficiaries, while some have lost their farm lands (as a result of the government projects).
Social mobilization – the process of bringing together all feasible and practical intersectoral allies to raise awareness of and demand for a particular program, to assist in the delivery of resources and services and to strengthen community participation to bring about social change (Ik-Bae, 2008).
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
Design of the Study
This research used the case studies of two government projects – the Pangil River Dam and the Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure projects – in the Fourth District of Laguna and how these affected the peasant communities in the district. Data were gathered in various barangays in the said district from August 15 to 24, 2008, with data verification on various dates in September of the same year, and validation of some facts in March 26, 2009.
Respondents and Sampling
Three community organizers from PUMALAG were purposively selected to narrate their stories regarding the Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure and other peasant problems in the Fourth District’ the effects of the structure on the peasant communities; and the communication strategies they used to organize the peasants in these communities.
Two key leaders of the MNKKB were also purposively selected to shed light on the social mobilization strategies and processes in organizing and mobilizing the residents of lower Pangil, as well as residents of other municipalities, other sectors such as students, skilled workers, women, and church leaders who were against the dam project.
With the guidance of the said organizers and leaders of the two farmers’ groups, peasant-respondents from the towns of Pakil, Paete, upper and lower Pangil, and Kalayaan were contacted to take part in the focus group discussions (FGDs). The researcher identified the farmer-respondents based on the recommendation of the PUMALAG organizers. These respondents, in turn, recommended other farmers for more FGDs. Hence, a snowball sampling was used; 15 respondents joined these FGDs.
Meanwhile, to hear the voice of the government project developers, the three municipal agricultural officers (MAOs) of Pakil, Paete, and Pangil were purposively chosen to explain particulars about the Napindan Channel and other issues related to the project.
Data Gathering Instruments and Methods
A combination of several data gathering methods was employed in this study.
Key informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted with the MAOs, PUMALAG community organizers, and MNKKB key leaders to discuss the problems of the peasants in the Fourth District as well as the historical background of agrarian problems in the community, especially the case of the Napindan channel and dam projects in Pangil. The key informants from PUMALAG and MNKKB were also asked about the communication strategies (in terms of message, channels, and approaches used) they employed in organizing and mobilizing the local residents.
FGDs were used with the farmers to determine the effects of the communication strategies employed by the PUMALAG and MNKKB in organizing the communities to act on these projects.
The researcher conducted direct observation by staying in the communities for about a month and by visiting them at various intervals.
Secondary data were gathered by reviewing back issues of magazines, newspapers, and municipal and court petition papers.
Data analysis
The key informant interviews, FGDs, and observations yielded mostly narratives or story forms. Hence, this study is a collection of the written and verbal stories of the groups of farmers and fisher folks, three municipal agriculture officers, and three peasant organizers and leaders in the local communities in the Fourth District of Laguna as well as the researcher’s personal observations.
These stories together with those gathered from secondary sources were presented in descriptive and narrative forms. Hence, analysis of the data is primarily based on the subjective views of the respondents and of the researcher.
No comments:
Post a Comment