Sistemas de comunicación: la difusión, la propagación y la propaganda

This section presents two instruments of participation: (1) extensionists and (2) producer groups. These are seen as tools for promoting both the objectives and the intensities of participation and are also related to the notions of participation as a mean and as an end in itself. Extensionists are supposed to be simpler instruments than producer groups and more suitable for promoting participation as a mean. That is, the simplest objectives of participation, such as cost-sharing and project efficiency, and the lowest intensities of participation, such as information-sharing and consultation. Producer groups are seen to be instruments capable of promoting the highest intensities of participation such as decision­ making and direct action, and the most complex objectives, such as capacity-building and empowerment. Both instruments however are seen as having the potential to contribute to all

intensities and objectives of participation to different degrees (Paul, 1987).

(1) Extensionists: Agents of c h ange or facilitators of e m p o w erment?

In general, implementing agencies use field workers to interact with and mobilise project beneficiaries. Although they operate directly with project members at community level, they are part of the project or extension agency. Nevertheless, it is assumed that spontaneous action and change is unlikely to be sufficient to empower the poor, and external support and expertise is often necessary (Midgley and Hall, 1986; Friedmann, 1992) . It is said that their performance as instruments of participation depends primarily on their 'orientation' and 'commitment' to producers' needs and participation. Although their community mobilization skills and attitudes can be influenced by training, when they see themselves essentially as agents of the government or donor their ability to promote and sustain participation can be compromised (Paul, 1987).

According to the diffusion-of-innovation approach, extensionists are seen as the link between the extension institution and the farmers. His or her primary role consists of developing the needs of the latter by changing their attitudes and behaviour basically in terms of the technology they use. In addition, they are expected to provide information and persuade producers to adopt technological innovations. Once the decision to adopt is made, their role is to reinforce the message in order to prevent farmers from rejecting the diffused

agents are seen mainly as communicators and teachers, who are not concerned with dialogue but with persuasion (Skinner, 1974; Mackenzie, 1977) . They are also seen as playing leadership and active roles, such as coordinators and organizers of groups and communities, catalysts of action, advocates of innovation, enforcers of regulations and planners (FAO, 1980).

In contrast, participatory approaches see the extensionists' role as being that of facilitator of group development and the participation process and are expected to organize a structure for learning (Dilts, 1997). Normally, his or her role is referred to as that of convenors, scientists, consultants, searching for what people need and supporting them

(Chambers, 1989). They are seen as educators, according to the problem-posing model of education, or communicators, facilitators, liberators and activists, in harmony with the dialogue process (Freire, 1972, 1973). The extensionists' role of raising the social and political consciousness of the poor is stressed, in particular with the aim of empowering them (Freire, 1972; Hollnsteiner, 1982; Midgley, 1986). Likewise, participatory approaches see the extensionists' basic task as being "to spark endogenous change 'from within', not to carry out the change program, that is a responsibility of the organized community" (Friedmann, 1992, p . 144). In addition, they are expected to help community groups to move to 'new challenges' and 'appropriate actions', with the aim of gaining access to political and social power. They are to provide support that encourages the powerless to free themselves from traditional dependency (Hall, 1986; Friedmann, 1992).

Extensionists' backgrounds can create barriers to their relationship with producers. In general, they have very

different cultural backgrounds from those of the farmers and are educated in colleges or technical schools (Rogers, 1983; Chambers, 1983, 1989; Paul, 1987). The TOT approach suggests that extensionists should have empathy and credibility with producers to be accepted by them, for it can affect adoption. In theory, this would allow extensionists to see things through farmers' eyes for diagnosing farmers' problems. In reality, however, it is argued that it causes extensionists to prefer contacting the better off and more educated farmers who understand them better and are more prepared to adopt i n n o v a t i o n s .

Resource-poor and less educated farmers demand conflicting roles of the change agent for their needs are different from those which can be met simply by extensionists (Rogers, 1983; Chambers, 1989). The Community Participation and Farmer-First approaches propose that extensionists commit themselves to the needs and interests of the poor, and listen to them, because they know their own situation better than anyone else. It also believes that reversals of professionalism and management are necessary (Chambers, 1983; 1989; Paul, 1987). Farmer extensionists is an alternative which may close the gap between community members and extension worker

(Scarborough et al, 1997).

(2) User groups: facilitating participation or adoption The organization of user groups is said to have the potential to promote the highest level of participation, in terms of highest intensities and complex objectives. Groups may operate at any intensity of participation, and they can also move from one level to another over time (Paul, 1987) . The

early diffusionist extension fostered groups in which the most progressive farmers were expected to influence others. Later, when diffusion research suggested that other aspects, such as culture, religion, kinship, economic interests and social status influenced the diffusion process, and that conflicting elements might inhibit diffusion, extension began to work with more homogeneous groups (Roling, 1982, 1988; FAO, 1980).

In general, diffusionist extension leads groups directly. It may decide to lead indirectly, when it judges that dialogue is productive and farmers are able to lead themselves. Groups are encouraged to form societies and clubs, and work cooperatively towards their interests. They are organized by gender and by age. There are men and women's groups and youth clubs. The youth group is seen as the most progressive audience of all. Extension believes that it can educate youth groups to serve the community and ensure greater innovation in the future. Groups are seen as the basis for farmers' organization. They can serve farmers' specific interests such as marketing and transport. Farmers' groups are expected to work on a cooperative basis and not become involved in religious and political matters (Seville, 1965).

In the context of community participation, groups are employed in a quite different way. They are considered tools for people to access all the dimensions of participation, and a critical requirement for enabling the poor to participate actively in development. They are perceived mainly as local level mechanisms that can promote and sustain development

(Midgley, 1986). The forms of organization that simply use groups as tools for facilitating projects or policy implementation leave the poor out (Hall, 1988). Organizations

capable of promoting participation of the poor must emerge as a result of their own debate and action. Their development and internal structure need to develop as a natural process and result from peoples' own decisions, and not be imposed from outside. Although external support is seen as crucial, it must help and not dominate the organization (Oakley, 1991; Friedmann, 1992).

Extension group membership is expected to be based on common interests and needs, normally limited to between 10 and 35 members. Formal or membership organizations are associations, trade unions and cooperatives that seek benefits for their members by performing economic and political roles (Oakley and Marsden, 1984; Friedmann, 1992). The group's role is described as to gain access to bases of productive wealth and power, which includes the power to negotiate, bring political pressure on the state, receive credit, make bulk purchases at a discount, and accomplish more advantageous marketing (Friedmann, 1992). It is suggested that group process should follow key stages to sustain 'authentic participation'. These are (a) problem identification, (b) diagnosis of the situation and discussion of the problems, (c) development of internal organization, (d) the creation of awareness and training and, finally (e) accomplishing group action and developing linkages and articulation with other groups (Hall et al, 1988).

Problem identification (a) and diagnosis (b) presuppose joint action by farmers and extensionists, as emphasised by participatory approaches (Chambers, 1983, 1989; Scarborough et al, 1997). These stages also linked to identifying and understanding the structural causes of dependency (Freire,

1972, 1973; Friedmann, 1992). Internal organization (c) is m ainly concerned with developing group cohesion and leadership.

It is suggested that groups promoted by internal leadership are likely to achieve a high level of participation (Paul, 1987). Nevertheless, leaders are likely to be coopted, and groups and communities forced to comply with state rules to gain access to benefits. Group cohesion is said to be strengthened by internal conflicts when sorted out within a framework of democracy, diverse organizations and social practices (Friedmann, 1992).

Promoting learning (d) is one of the most important attributes of groups and organizations (Friedmann, 1992). It facilitates the ability of people to learn about democracy, how to defend a position, listen to one another, decide together, divide the work to be done, set objectives and attempt experiments (Palma, 1987) . They have an important role to play in training for participatory skills, and providing structured opportunities for training at local level. As farmer's organizations develop, they can make decisions by themselves and undertake actions, which are considered the means to realize social and political powers (Hall and Midgley, 1988; Oakley, 1991; Friedmann, 1992). However, organizing people at local level does not necessarily ensure that they can influence development policies. Once some level of organization is achieved, linking them up with others, through social networks can promote solidarity and provides the chance to share experience and knowledge (Oakley, 1991; Evans, 1996).

Groups and organizations form the basis of decentralization which is a major goal of all participatory approaches. It is argued that development requires devolving central functions and resources to regional and local

governments, although these need not necessarily be formal power structures of government (Friedmann, 1992) . It means changing the way bureaucracies operate to allow greater autonomy at local level (Chambers, 1983), increasing diversity by creating effective and democratically elected representative decision-making bodies with clearly defined powers to administer programmes and control revenues (Midgley, 1986). The idea of a local development council suggested by Majeres (1977) is an alternative method of implementing these principles. It should take responsibility for the administration at local level, initiate infrastructural and social development projects, be linked to higher authorities and be a channel for communicating ideas and innovations upwards. Allocating financial resources and monitoring and supervision in this type of local decision-making bodies from the government would be necessary.