Global Alliance: General Comments and Contributions

Dear Rafael,

 
I have gone through the document several times. The plans for next steps sound appropriate and I am sure we can modify some smaller deadlines and issues along the way - but over all it sounds like an excellent plan for moving forward.

 
I like the inclusive nature - and yes also the acknowledgement of the diverse range of approaches in relation to the naming of this initiative.

 
As ICA rep - and as the Vice Chair of Global Communication Social Change division, I would like to work to develop more of a role for academic collaborators - I see academic collaborators as doing a service in this context - and therefore we should take a collaborative approach rather than lead the agendas. Having said that we have faculty who have  developed developed through years of research and teaching and community engaged collaborations in the division of Global communication and social change. Our training and experience also allows us to spend more time in developing methodologies and writing reports and grants to help produce evidence based arguments in collaboration with activists and NGO officials. Also in terms of the low hanging fruit we as a sub committee should develop some concrete plans. The Bali conference is looking good and we will no doubt have other such meetings - but it would be a good idea also to work towards producing some concrete reports that connect grassroots concerns to policy building networks and to map the relationship to SDGs more clearly.

 
In order to assist in the implementation of the goals and plans that we are developing there is scope to mobilize research groups to work in collaboration.

 
Further - as I am planner for the Global Communication and Social Change division for the ICA conference to be hosted in Prague in 2018, I suggest we develop a roundtable proposal drawing from some of the issues that emerge in these meetings - the deadline for the submission of the roundtable proposal is coming up in a few weeks so I will start conceptualizing it and request that members of the subcommittee who are able and willing join this roundtable as I propose it.

 
I apologize for not being able to be present for the call on tuesday - but Ms. Zehui Dai who is a member of the Global Communication and Social Change division at ICA and my doctoral advisee and research collaborator has agreed to call in and take notes for me. She will of course participate based on conversations she and I have had after reading the document.

 
thanks!

Radhika
 
 
____
Radhika Gajjala
radhikagajjala.org
 
Professor, American Culture Studies Program, School of Cultural and Critical Studies
and
Professor, Department of Communication, School  of Media and Communication
 
Bowling Green State University,
Bowling Green, Ohio, USA
 
 
Co-editor of ADA: Journal of Gender and New Media
http://adanewmedia.org
___

Hi Rafael and Warren,

First of all, thanks for all your great work on the initial draft. Great to have the opportunity to comment. I am adding my comments, mostly repeating what I mentioned during our conference call.

2.      From the current name ideas, only one is including the term “behavior change” while all of them carry communication. I wonder why the currently widely acknowledged term SBCC or SBC is too narrow? It already includes social change, behavior change and communication?  I know that Sue and Patrick have already suggested other names.

3.      The list of participating SBC or communication networks and organizations is impressive: What criteria were you using to select them and not others? I saw that Warren Feek already picked up on my comment from the conference call, great!

4.      Good idea to describe the breadth of our community with the dichotomy of information/engagement. Since in behavior change we are constantly confronted with the issue that information – by itself – rarely changes behaviors, could we add something? Could we say: information, motivation and engagement? Would that work to cover a bit more of the behavioral thinking?

5.      I would still identify the different disciplines that fuel our profession and aim to have some representation among the participating networks:

a.      Media/Communication studies;

b.      Health Communication, Health Promotion/Public Health;

c.      Behavioral Sciences [= the empirical study of human behavior and decision making, spanning the disciplines of psychology, economics, sociology, anthropology, neuroscience, and political science);

d.      Marketing and Design;

e.      ICT including M & E-Health;

f.       What am I forgetting here? Maybe Sociology/Political science by itself to include social movements, social change, participation and collective action?

Best for now,

Antje

Antje Becker-Benton

Senior Advisor/Team Leader, Behavior Change and Community Health, Dept. of Global Health

Save the Children USA

Office:  202.794.1555

899 North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 800

Washington, D.C. 20002

Thanks again for pulling this together! Lots to think about.

I echo some of the concerns about what we call it in a way that can be understood by those outside the community. Especially as it seemingly encompasses two distinct streams - SBC and Media for development - and goals. Also wonder in this context how and whether we will be able to priortize action if the agendas are different. Guess we'll cross that bridge soon enough.

I like where the inform and engage is trying to go, but not feeling it with the "inform". While the explanation deepens the understanding of "inform", as a shorthand it has a top down nuance...

B. Mission: this sounds more like a vision to me and C. Priorties sounds more like the Mission.

On Key Action Points feels a bit of a heavy lift, but as noted in discussion key is to hone in on something that is readily actionable and a potentially a quick win.

Cheers, Susan

Dear All

I am a bit worried that the Alliance as it is configured would exclude the voices of the South and have a very strong focus on voices from the North. Despite the organisations being international organisation such as UNICEF and USAID the voices will be those mainly from the North. Many southern organisations arent organised and I do get the point that it is a good idea to organise (such as the EE component) however the resources for such organisation remains in the North.

We need to be mindful of this and (as I pointed out at the meeting) be very aware of hwo is at the table. maybe the table should move south?

Best

Sue