Communication Strategy for Russia's Development Assistance by World Bank Russia

DISCUSSION PAPER

COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY FOR RUSSIA’S DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE: A REVIEW OF OTHER DONORS’ EXPERIENCE By Christopher Neal & Svetlana Markova1

PURPOSE This paper reviews the public positioning of official development assistance (ODA) programs of selected donor countries∗, as well as that of multilateral development institutions. It compares and contrasts their communications objectives, messages, strategies, practices and products. It also discusses the organizational structures that governments and multilaterals have established to manage public information and communications on development aid. Based on this review and the Concept Paper for Russia’s International Development Assistance, it suggests issues for discussion towards developing a communications strategy and plan for Russia’s ODA program.

Christopher Neal is Senior Communications Advisor at the World Bank Institute and a former Director General of Communications at the Canadian International Development Agency. Svetlana Markova is a communications consultant at the World Bank Group. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not engage the World Bank Group in any way. ∗ United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Germany, Sweden, Japan, Spain and Poland.

COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY FOR RUSSIA’S DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE: A REVIEW OF OTHER DONORS’ EXPERIENCE TABLE OF CONTENTS

Context & Background

Why have a communications program for ODA? i. Sovereign Governments ii. Multilateral development institutions

Review of government aid donor communications

i. ii. iii. iv. v.

Key Messages Use of polling data Level of spending on information & communications Distribution of communications resources Involvement of CSOs in communications

Review of multilateral donors’ communications

Working with the Media

Organizing the Communications Function

Communications Strategy for Russia’s ODA: Issues to Consider

i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. 8.

Guidelines Specific questions Media Environment Web Outreach Access to Information Private Sector Involvement Civil Society Engagement Youth Participation

Recommendations

Annexes

36 40 2

1. CONTEXT & BACKGROUND Development aid, although it is now a fixture in all developed countries’ foreign policies, did not exist until after the Second World War. While humanitarian relief activity sometimes took place in the 19th century, it was usually temporary and led by private individuals and organizations. The idea of states giving aid to other states to relieve suffering or fight poverty was unheard of, even unimagined, until the 1950s.2 While this paper is devoted to exploring the communications dimension of development aid programs, this aspect is inextricably tied to the ultimate purpose of aid as defined by the givers of aid. Communications work aimed at building public support for aid consists, essentially, of explaining, promoting and defending both its purpose and its performance. So why do countries give aid? Over the past half-century, an international consensus has evolved to support the idea that governments of rich countries should provide public funds, usually in the form of grants, to the governments of developing countries, to improve the quality of life in those countries. This idea first came to light in 1949, when US President Harry Truman, in his inaugural address, announced that his country would launch, “a bold new program for making the benefits of our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas.” Truman clearly identified this new “Point Four” program, as part of his administration’s effort to counter the influence of Soviet-style Communism which was seen as a threat to the US and its allies.3 Despite its genesis as a tool of hard-headed diplomacy to gain international influence during the Cold War, foreign aid has been sustained and, in fact, has achieved some of its more dramatic growth spurts after that Cold War ended. The most generous donors—in terms of official development assistance-to-gross national income (ODA-to-GNI)—are northern European and Nordic countries, and their aid is largely unrelated to geopolitics. All member states of the OECD give aid; the 15 European Union members who are also on the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC), account for 60 percent of all DAC countries’ development assistance.4 While overall official aid growth has stalled since 2005, largely due to the end of exceptionally high levels of debt relief in the preceding years, many new players have entered the field. Non-DAC countries such as the Russian Federation, the Czech 2

See Carol Lancaster, Foreign Aid – Diplomacy, Development, Domestic Politics, (University of Chicago Press: Chicago & London, 2007), for an excellent review and analysis of the history and motives driving aid programs, with five in-depth case studies on the US, France, Japan, Germany and Denmark. 3 Harry S Truman, Inaugural Address, January 20, 1949 (http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres53.html) 4 EU countries’ aid totaled US$62.1 billion in 2007, equal to 0.4 percent of their combined GNI. (“Debt Relief is down: Other ODA rises slightly, OECD Aid Statistics, 04/04/2008: http://www.oecd.org/document/8/0,3343,en_2649_34447_40381960_1_1_1_1,00.html)

Republic, Hungary, Iceland, Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and the Slovak Republic have launched aid programs and/or contributed to multilateral initiatives, as have emerging market nations such as China, India and Turkey. Many new donors have launched their aid programs to fulfill a requirement of their recently-acquired membership in the European Union. Others are utilizing aid as a tool of foreign policy, to support poverty reduction while also strengthening diplomatic, commercial and investment ties with developing countries. Like those of more established donors, these development aid programs all arise from and respond to a variety of motivations, including, among others: • Promoting ideas and values such as democracy and democratic governance, economic freedom and capitalist economy, respect for human rights, and gender equality. • A humanitarian impulse to relieve suffering caused by poverty, drought, pestilence, war and disasters, both natural and man-made. • An urgent demand to address global problems that affect all countries, but which no one country can tackle alone, such as climate change and environmental. degradation; diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB, as well as epidemics such as avian flu and SARS; terrorism anchored in fragile and failing states; and refugee crises. • Gaining access to natural resources, such as oil, gas and minerals, as well as primary commodities such as food grains, lumber and rubber. • Gaining access to developing-country markets, for direct and portfolio investment, trade and services. • A desire to assist people of similar racial, ethnic, language, religious, philosophical or professional backgrounds. • A diplomatic effort to sustain political and/or military allies, especially those having vital resources and/or strategically-important geographical locations, including neighboring countries. Most of these motives can be organized into three broad categories: 1) moral and development values 2) economic and commercial interests 3) national security considerations. In addition, many of these motives for aid also share a significant characteristic: they emerge from domestic constituencies of one kind or another in the donor countries. The moral values motive is often articulated by public interest non-governmental organizations (NGOs), both secular and religious, certain political parties, labor unions and student/youth groups, as well as entertainment celebrities. The economic and commercial interests’ motive is reflected in the interest in the aid budget shown by industrial, manufacturing, agricultural, service and trade groups. They

also include private sector companies seeking to use the aid program to gain access to markets and/or resources. The national security motive is typically driven from inside government, by foreign affairs and defence ministries who see the development aid program as a valuable tool in furthering the donor nation’s security agenda, as it can strengthen alliances, and enable access to leaders in strategically-important regions. Global Public Goods and the New World of Development Discussion of development aid has evolved from these three categories of motives, which are focused on aid from one nation-state to others, to one focused increasingly on “global public goods”. The term Global Public Goods (GPG) refers to issues affecting all nations and people, for which solutions depend not just on collaboration among nations, but among private sector companies and civil society as well. These include efforts to stop HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, to mitigate and adapt to climate change, to address crises such as energy and food prices, to fix the global trading system, and rebuild fragile states that threaten peace and provide staging areas for terrorism. These issues have had the effect of merging the driving motives for aid, as addressing them is compelling on moral, commercial and security grounds all at once. This fusion of the purposes for aid has coincided with a gradual shift in the sustaining forces behind it. Where foreign aid was once a “top-down” phenomenon, driven by political leaders and policymakers who designed aid programs to serve foreign policy objectives, it has now become just as much a “bottom-up” one, in which civil society organizations and domestic interest groups—including political parties—articulate “moral values” and GPG arguments to press governments to maintain a foreign aid program, and seek to shape its content and purposes. This is especially true among the largest European donor countries (in ODA-to-GNI terms), where the foreign aid program has become an external expression of a deeply-anchored social democratic consensus around the idea that the state should redistribute income to achieve a measure of social justice. This shift has increased the importance of strategic communications for these government development aid programs, as the state must demonstrate to various domestic audiences interested in the foreign aid program—its “stakeholders”—that their interests are being addressed. Alternatively, if the government has a foreign aid agenda for which the domestic constituency is weak or non-existent, that government must develop a public case to build domestic support for its agenda, and to forestall potential criticism of it.5 5

The Government of Canada, for example, launched a major communications effort from 2006 to promote results of its development aid program in Afghanistan, which grew quickly to become Canada’s largest bilateral aid program, rising in conjunction with Canadian troops sent there to support the Karzai government. This communications campaign was aimed at sustaining public support among Canadians for the overall Canadian contribution to the multinational force in Afghanistan. Polls showed about 50 percent of Canadians supported the mission in mid-2006, but this was at risk of dropping as growing numbers of Canadian soldiers were killed. By highlighting progress in poverty reduction, improvements in the status of Afghan women, and Afghan children’s school attendance, the 50 percent public support for the mission has been sustained, despite mounting criticism from those who oppose the mission.

This “bottom-up” pressure and scrutiny on development aid efforts by national governments is not just domestic, but global. International organizations such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations and its various agencies, along with regional multilateral institutions such as the Asian Development Bank and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, have all been challenged over the past decade by an engaged global network of civil society organizations, including the private sector, voluntary NGOs, and single-issue advocacy groups, that have mobilized around global public goods agendas. At the same time, new players have emerged. In addition to the new bilateral donors mentioned above, new dedicated multilateral funds have been created to deal with specific problems, such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, to which donors, including governments and private foundations, have contributed $10.5 billion since it was established in 2001.6 A series of Carbon Finance Funds have been established at the World Bank by various donors under the aegis of Kyoto Protocol commitments, in which credits for greenhouse gas emissions purchased by rich-country corporations are used to finance projects to mitigate and/or adapt to climate change.7 Private foundations have become major actors in development too. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, founded in the 1990s, has an endowment of $37.3 billion, to which U.S. investor Warren Buffett is contributing $1.5 billion every year. Its grant payments exceeded $2 billion in 2007, more than the annual aid disbursements of many sovereign governments.8 Other private and voluntary organizations that have emerged in recent years include Transparency International, a private sector-driven effort to fight corruption, because, it says, “corruption hurts everyone, and it harms the poor the most”; and Kiva.org, a website-based U.S. organization through which 270,000 lenders have directly funded 40,000 low-income borrowers in 40 countries with a total of about $27 million in small loans.9 These organizations emerge from and reflect an explosion of interest in development, in which communications and public debate has played a huge mobilizing role. Development and global public goods have become the leitmotif for our times; those who define the agenda—such as Nobel Prize-winners Muhammad Yunus, who founded the Grameen Bank, and Kenya’s Greenbelt Movement leader Wangari Mathai, as well as economists Jeffrey Sachs and Joseph Stiglitz—have become celebrities. Meantime, many who are already celebrities have associated themselves with poverty, development and global public goods: Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Bono, Angelina Jolie, and Oprah Winfrey, among others. 6

To date, the Russian Federation has contributed $118 million to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. 7 World Bank Carbon Finance Unit: http://carbonfinance.org/ 8 Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation: http://www.gatesfoundation.org/AboutUs/ 9 See “When Small Loans Make a Big Difference,” Forbes Magazine, June 3, 2008: http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneursfinance/2008/06/03/kiva-microfinance-uganda-ent-fincx_0603whartonkiva.html

These people, and the organizations they support to push for development and social change, are part of an emerging global society of mobilized citizens, adept at using the Internet and the World-wide Web, including its most recent innovations such as YouTube, Facebook and blogs. Over 120,000 blogs are created every day, and many of them address development issues; some are devoted to acting as “watchdogs” of governments, including their foreign aid agencies and activities.10 In short, this is a huge massive movement that has pushed development issues from the margins to the mainstream of public debate. Using the latest tools of communications technology, its multifaceted members are putting the spotlight on the performance of governments and multilateral agencies, pressing them to be more innovative and effective in delivering on the development agenda, as well as more transparent and accountable. Those planning a development aid program need to consider how it will be perceived in this busy marketplace of ideas and agendas, and reflect on the communications dimension of their initiative. 2. WHY HAVE A COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT AID? i. Sovereign governments’ aid programs All government programs need communications support As mentioned above, strategic communications for a government’s development aid program shares, at one level, the same objectives as all other government communications. That is to explain, promote and defend the policies, programs and services of the government to its citizens. At this level, there is a fiduciary responsibility for governments to be accountable to citizens and taxpayers, to explain how their money is being spent, and what goods and services their government is producing. In recent years, donor countries have refocused their domestic communications programs on “showing results” of their development aid, to address skepticism about whether aid reaches the poor, and a widespread belief—revealed in opinion polling data across many countries—that much aid money is stolen by corrupt officials in developing countries, or wasted as a result of bureaucratic inefficiency. Accountability requires a basic communications effort. When government operations are challenged by critics or by widespread public skepticism, this communications effort needs to be intensified. Development aid: a special case due to a knowledge gap In the case of development aid, many countries add a second mandate to complement this strictly “corporate communications” function. It is to raise public awareness and understanding of the development challenges that give rise to the need for development aid. This mandate has been introduced by many donors because the need for development 10

UK blog, Burning our Money: How the Government Spends the Money We Earn & How We Can Stop Them: http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/06/more-aid-waste.html

aid is not self-evident to many taxpayers, as is the case with government programs such as, for example, health, education, highways, law enforcement, or border security. In order to support development aid, people have to understand why it is needed, which means they must have a basic awareness of issues such as poverty, hunger, disease and climate change, among others, which aid is intended to help solve. And, importantly, they must be presented with evidence that aid actually delivers results in the form of measureable progress in overcoming these problems. Indeed, opinion surveys reveal that citizens with more knowledge of international development issues are more supportive of aid programs. Many donors seek to build this kind of public awareness with long-term programs that target schools and young people with campaigns, curricula and learning materials, special thematic days and weeks devoted to development, celebrity spokespersons, posters and publicity materials. To consult and respond to key domestic constituencies The domestic constituencies interested in the aid program will seek to participate in it, by contributing their knowledge, expertise and resources to it. They will also seek to influence its direction, purpose and content. Most donor countries acknowledge this and encourage it, recognizing that the involvement of these groups—properly managed—will result in more effective aid. Their involvement in the aid program also tends to result in their public expression of support for it which, in turn, influences the general public to support it as well. For these reasons, most donors devote considerable effort and resources to consulting and building partnerships with these constituencies. They include academics, universities and think tanks; organizations, consultants and private companies specialized in health, education, agriculture, scientific research and infrastructure; religious groups, trade unions and women’s associations; municipal and other sub-national governments; water, telecoms and power utilities; and a wide range of voluntary agencies. Even as the development community has reached broad consensus on untying aid, domestic expertise is still needed to deliver the aid program, including private sector and specialized organizations. Untying has not eliminated these donor-country constituencies from the aid landscape; they have accepted the new, more competitive rules of the game, and remain very much engaged. In many federal states, sub-national governments have jurisdiction over such areas as education, health and municipal affairs, among others, so their involvement in the foreign aid program is essential. Many donor governments hold formal consultations with these groups, seeking their views in shaping the government’s aid policies and programs. Given their experience, many of these groups succeed in winning competitive bidding contests for donor-agency contracts to deliver aid programs and projects in developing countries. These partnerships extend to communications. Companies and organizations hired by governments to implement aid projects are often required—as part of their contract—to develop communications activities to inform domestic audiences of their work.

Promote donor countries abroad Our focus has been on domestic audiences, as they are the prime target audience for government communications. But development aid has an important diplomatic dimension for most donor countries, and this, too, requires communications support. Donor countries choose the recipient countries for their aid based on a shifting mix of criteria, as we have seen, including national security, commercial interests and, of course, moral and development (poverty reduction) values. Communications efforts are usually deployed in the recipient countries to announce projects and programs, especially during state visits by officials from the donor country. Exchanges of students on scholarship programs, cooperants and volunteers, visiting technical experts, are also highlighted with communications activities in the recipient country. News coverage of these activities often surfaces in the donor country’s media. For example, in Canada, the country’s Governor-General Michaelle Jean, of Haitian origin, has visited Africa, Latin America and Haiti, often emphasizing Canada’s cooperation programs and getting positive media coverage for them at home. Similarly, when Sadako Ogata, the well-known head of the Japanese International Cooperation Agency, travels abroad, JICA invites Japan’s national NHK television to accompany her; this generates prominent, positive coverage on national television. Most donors also undertake communications initiatives to highlight their contributions to development during high-profile international conferences, typically having Ministers make major aid package announcements. Manage risk Communications strategies are developed not only to explain and promote, but also to defend government policies and programs when they face public criticism or politicallymotivated opposition. Also, communications strategies are needed when aid failures or violations of public trust provoke controversy, and threaten to damage the public credibility of the aid program. In short, communications are needed to manage the political risks that exist in the conception and delivery of development aid. A key audience for which communications must be managed in this respect, is that of elected legislators. If a donor country’s political system confers decision-making power over the foreign aid program on parliamentarians, a targeted communications strategy and program must be developed to address this important audience. Both Japan and Canada have maintained sustained communications efforts on this front. Similarly, the news media can have a huge impact on public perceptions of the aid program; relations with the media are consequently a vital function in most donors’ communications program, a subject to which we turn in Section 4 of this paper. ii. Multilateral Development Institutions Multilateral development institutions such as the World Bank and United Nations agencies also recognize the need to have multifaceted communications programs to support their work. The purposes driving their communications efforts are, in many ways,

similar to those behind national governments’ aid agencies. But they are also distinct, in that they reflect a different perspective, that of a global or regional consensus that national governments can use to complement their own communications activities. The World Bank Group, for example, states its mission as being to build “a world free of poverty”. It seeks, through its lending, policy advice and knowledge services, to help countries achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), as well as to promote global public goods agendas such as reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, mitigating and adapting to climate change, reforming the global trading system, and facilitating developing countries’ access to finance for investments in infrastructure, agriculture and private sector development, among others. The Bank and other international institutions such as the United Nations Development Program, the United Nations’ Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the World Food Program, and the World Health Organization, as well as regional development banks, use communications to promote the consensus forged by their member countries’ representatives. They seek support for that consensus from civil society organizations and the private sector, as well as their shareholders and donors, including the member countries themselves. Organizations focused on specific issues, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, or UNAIDS, deploy communications efforts to educate key audiences on the importance of these issues, and the results achieved by their agencies’ interventions. These communications activities are ultimately aimed at sustaining financial support from donors, and political support from host countries, for the agencies’ work Like national governments, multilateral organizations’ communications efforts are also aimed at managing risks posed by project failures, allegations of impropriety, or mismanagement of funds. Here too, as in individual countries, managing relations with the media—which are global, networked and operating 24/7—is a critical function. 3. REVIEW OF GOVERNMENT AID DONOR COMMUNICATIONS i.

Key Messages

As can be seen in Table 1, the communications programs of OECD donor countries are strikingly similar in their messages and practices, reflecting the consensus that has emerged over the past decade around the MDGs.

Table 1 – Donor Country Policy Priorities & Key Messages Country

Policy Priorities

Key Messages

United Kingdom

DFID aims to help countries achieve the MDGs by 2015, and manages Britain's aid to end extreme poverty. DFID also responds to emergencies, both natural and man-made. DFID’s mandate is defined by an International Development Act, which requires that the aid program be focused on poverty reduction. German Development Co-operation contributes to international efforts to achieve the MDGs: Program of Action 2015 for Poverty Reduction (2001). The major objectives of BMZ are reducing global poverty, safeguarding peace and making globalization equitable and sustainable. MDGs are the point of departure in policy for Sweden’s global development effort, with the focus on poverty reduction.

DFID: Leading the British Government's fight against world poverty; Smarter working = smarter aid.

Germany

Sweden

Canada

Japan

Poland

CIDA’s aim is to reduce poverty, promote human rights, and support sustainable development. While Canada’s current (Conservative) government has not explicitly embraced the MDGs, a bill sponsored by an opposition Liberal Member of Parliament defining “poverty reduction and protection of human rights” as the purpose of Canadian aid, was unanimously adopted. JICA activities are being reorganized around principles of (1) a field-oriented approach; (2) human security; (3) effectiveness, efficiency, and speed. We will advance international cooperation through sharing of knowledge and experience, and work to build a more peaceful and prosperous world. JICA is working to achieve the MDGs by undertaking various projects around the world. There is no legal charter or legislation to define ODA; its purpose and volume is at the government’s discretion. The aims of Polish foreign assistance are: 1) reduction of poverty and fulfillment of the other MDGs; 2) ensuring democracy, rule of law, civil society development and respect for human rights – predominantly in Eastern Europe.

It is only in a world free of poverty men and women can give the best of themselves (Kofi A. Annan); Today, we are truly a global family. What happens in one part of the world may affect us all (Dalai Lama); To deny any person their human rights is to challenge their very humanity (Nelson Mandela). Sida's goal is to help poor people improve their living conditions; Sida’s roles in development cooperation include analyzing poverty and trends in the world, listening and conducting a dialogue and channeling funds and other resources to the programs of poor countries to reduce poverty. Supporting sustainable development, reducing poverty and providing humanitarian assistance in order to promote a more secure, equitable and prosperous world; Move Your World… because you can!

A bridge linking Japan with the developing world; Confronting the world’s problems; Different approaches to a single goal; People advancing steadily step-by-step; Ensuring that millions of the world's most vulnerable people have access to education, healthcare and a social safety net.

Inspire democratic change & transition to democratic rule; Strengthen good governance & effective capacity-building; Support for free & independent media; Strengthening civil society institutions; Promoting observance of human rights, civil liberties, active citizenship standards

Spain

AECI's goal is to contribute to the eradication of the poverty in the world through the provision of human resources and materials. AECI focuses on the promotion of economic, social, human, and sustainable development in disadvantaged countries.

USA

MCC’s mission is to reduce global poverty by promoting sustainable economic growth. MCC is based on the principle that aid is most effective when it reinforces good governance, economic freedom and investments in people. Before a country can become eligible to receive assistance, MCC looks at their performance on independent and transparent policy indicators.

USA

USAID supports long-term and equitable economic growth and advances U.S. foreign policy objectives by supporting: 1) economic growth, agriculture and trade; 2) global health; 3) democracy, conflict prevention and humanitarian assistance. USAID plays a vital role in promoting U.S. national security, foreign policy, and the War on Terrorism. Japan's ODA contributes to the peace and development of the international community, and to ensure Japan's own security and prosperity. Japan has used its ODA to support economic and social infrastructure development, human resource development, and institution- building, especially in East Asia. TİKA defines development needs and targets as well as possible areas of cooperation and assistance while taking into consideration the nation’s priorities; Improving economic, commercial, technical, social, cultural and educational cooperation; Strengthening independent government bodies; Supporting efforts to transition to a market economy.

Japan

Turkey

The human being, object of development aid; Rights and liberty without discrimination; Promotion of sustainable and equitable development in which both women and men participate; Promote equitable growth in economy; Respect for international commitment. Reducing poverty through growth; Partnering to improve the lives of the poor; “The world’s help must encourage developing countries to make the right choices for their own people, and these choices are plain. Good government is an essential condition of development. So the Millennium Challenge Account will reward nations that root out corruption, respect human rights, and adhere to the rule of law.” (President Bush) USAID: from the American people; USAID provides economic and humanitarian assistance in over 100 countries to provide a better future for all; USAID works on behalf of Americans to improve the lives of people throughout the world; USAID shows the world our true character as a nation. Japan's International Cooperation: For the future of the world and the planet; Supporting self-help efforts of developing countries; Utilization of Japan's experience and expertise; Partnership and collaboration with the international community; Perspective of “Human Security”. Providing economic, commercial, technical, social, cultural and educational cooperation to developing countries via projects aimed at assisting the development of these countries. Emphasize Turkey's expertise in agriculture: “Agriculture is the core of national economy” (Mustafa Kemal Ataturk).

Of the countries under review, only the US and Japan do not explicitly embrace the MDGs in their policy stances and public messages. They are the principal exceptions, as the MDG consensus now includes almost all other donors. However, the US government, “accepts the goals as goals, but not as policy,” explained one senior official, as the US political system, which reserves policymaking and money appropriations powers, respectively, to the President and Congress, inhibits the US Government from signing on to international consensus agreements that would bind its foreign policy. This is reflected in the messages for USAID, in which “advancing US foreign policy objectives” is clearly

stated as a goal, unlike many other donors, who prefer to downplay this aspect of the aid program, and emphasize altruistic purposes instead. The widespread consensus around the MDGs as appropriate goals for donor and recipient countries to pursue has also provided a focus for these donors’ communications efforts. In addition to being sound policy objectives, the eight MDGs have significant advantages as communications tools of persuasion. First, they are straightforward, easy to understand and compelling: ending poverty and hunger, saving children’s lives, putting all children in school, ensuring women’s equality, making motherhood safe, stopping HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, protecting the environment, and building a global partnership for development. These are all worthy objectives with which few would disagree: they enjoy consensus among donors and recipient countries, and also among domestic publics in donor countries. A recent public opinion survey in the UK, for example, found that the substance of the goals—although not specifically identified as “MDGs”—enjoyed overwhelming support. For example, 92 percent of respondents said reducing malaria, HIV/AIDS and other major diseases was “very important” and another seven percent considered it “fairly important”. Nearly as many thought that the following were “very important”: reducing the number of children who die before they are five (91 percent); that all children should be able to go to school (90 percent); and reducing the number of women who die in childbirth (88 percent).11 While awareness of the MDGs themselves is not widespread except in a few countries, evidence from those countries in which they have been emphasized in aid program communications show gains in awareness of them.12 Second, the MDGs are, for the most part, measureable and efforts are being deployed to monitor progress on them. Third, verifiable progress is being made. These two characteristics are critical in light of the redoubled emphasis in aid donor communications programs on “showing results” to address public skepticism. To show results and progress, clear objectives must be established for aid programs and projects, and monitoring and evaluation systems put in place to gather and demonstrate evidence for the links between them and progress on the eight MDGs. This is not easy, but it is a task to which many resources have been assigned across the development aid community. In donor countries where the MDGs have been embraced as the foundation of the aid program’s priorities, communications managers view this step as a distinct advantage in mounting campaigns to build or sustain public support for development. Legislation that preserves this purpose for the aid program helps too, in that it ensures that development 11

Office for National Statistics (UK), Public Attitudes towards Development – Knowledge and Attitudes concerning poverty in developing countries, 2006 (Report by Deborah Lader, 1 Drummond Gate, London SW1V 2QQ, January 2007), p. 11. 12 In countries where a public campaign was sustained over several years, a higher proportion of people say they have heard about the MDGs, and some are capable of naming the goal(s) that was focused on in the Campaign (e.g. Netherlands, Finland). In the case of the Netherlands, over half of respondents who say they know about the goals can name one. In Finland only one-fifth (22%) of respondents who have heard about the MDGs say they don’t know a goal or give the wrong answer, compared to 73% of Swedish. See “Public Campaigns about the MDGs since 2003,” by Ida McDonnell, OECD/DAC, at http://www.oecd.org/document/31/0,3343,en_2649_34101_38405727_1_1_1_1,00.html

aid objectives will not fluctuate with electoral changes of parties in power. This is important as development publicity campaigns, given the usually limited resources available to support them (in contrast to commercial advertising, for example), need to be sustained over several years to have an impact. Of course, having a sustained focus for the aid program also helps ensure that it is effective in achieving development results; indeed, that is its over-riding advantage. But it also has another important advantage from a communications standpoint. By protecting the aid program from shifting political agendas, a legislated framework for the purpose of a country’s development aid enables countries to create “development education” programs aimed at schoolchildren. These must be based on development issues, and be free of politics, as an aid program excessively influenced by partisan interests creates perceptions that such education is merely propaganda in disguise. The United Kingdom adopted an “International Development Act” in 2002, which specifies that development assistance is to be provided only if the Secretary of State is satisfied that such aid, “is likely to contribute to a reduction in poverty.”13 This Act, which reflects the strong emphasis on development of the Blair government, has given the UK’s Department of International Development (DFID), said a DFID communications manager, “a clarity and voice for international development inside government and beyond, and has made it much easier to communicate one clear brand.”14 A counter-example is Canada, where the absence of a legislated framework for the aid program has resulted in shifts of emphasis following changes of government, or even changes of Ministers within the same government. A Conservative Party government elected with a minority in the country’s Parliament in January 2006, perhaps following a US lead, pointedly did not embrace the MDGs as the focus for the Canadian International Development Agency’s (CIDA) program. Without authorization for a poverty-focused pro-aid awareness campaign, there has been a lack of clarity in the Agency’s messages and, consequently, a decline in CIDA’s ability to lead and sustain its credibility on development issues. In May 2008, a bill sponsored by an Opposition Liberal Member of Parliament gained support across party lines and was adopted; like the UK Act, it requires that Canada’s development assistance “is provided with a central focus on poverty reduction, as well as in a manner that is consistent with Canadian values, Canada’s foreign policy, sustainable development and democracy promotion and in a manner that promotes international human rights standards.”15 This Better Aid Bill, as it is called, will require regular reporting on development results based on this poverty focus. It is also likely to realign Canada’s aid program with the MDGs, and help clarify CIDA’s focus.16 13

International Development Act, 2002, Office of Public Sector Information, United Kingdom (http://www.oecd.org/document/47/0,3343,en_2649_34101_39869615_1_1_1_1,00.html) 14 Interview 15 See website of John McKay, MP: http://www.johnmckaymp.on.ca/nm-show.asp?story=467 16

These observations are based on the author’s experience as Director General of Communications at CIDA from June 2006 to February 2008.

Poland, which decided in 1998 to support development cooperation and adopted its first aid strategy in 2003, has now recognized the need to go a step further and develop a legislative framework for its aid. Its Ministry of Foreign Affairs is currently drafting an “Act on Polish Development Assistance”, to define Poland’s foreign assistance as part of its foreign policy, aimed at enhancing and promoting of democracy and civil society building, as well as delivering Polish development assistance. Polish authorities have judged such an Act “indispensable” due to: • the need to assure properly co-ordinated development assistance (in compliance with the requirements of the EU) • the need to create effective and efficient financial mechanism • creating clear institutional and legal frame • the necessity to implement and apply solutions successfully tested in other developed countries, and guarantee the continuity of the Polish development policy and effective achievement of the set goals.17 DAC members that have conducted public campaigns on the MDGs include Norway, Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark and Austria. The UN Millennium Campaign also supported a very successful MDG Campaign in Italy which travelled to Spain, Germany and Portugal.18

“The Ways of Providing Polish Foreign Assistance”, http://www.polskapomoc.gov.pl/The,Ways,of,Providing,Polish,Foreign,Assistance,166.html 18

Ida McDonnell, “Public Campaigns about the MDGs since 2003,” (OECD-Development Assistance Committee: http://www.oecd.org/document/47/0,3343,en_2649_34101_39869615_1_1_1_1,00.html)

Sources: Special Eurobarometers 280 (2007) and 222 (2005), European Commission; Focus Canada, Environics Research Group (2004), Canadian Attitudes toward Development Assistance, Ottawa.

As can be seen in Figure 1 above, opinion surveys conducted in countries with campaigns to promote the MDGs suggest that these campaigns raised public awareness of the goals. These findings tend to reinforce the argument that a clear MDG focus enables a clear and sustained set of messages for a donor countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aid, delivered in a campaign that builds on public concerns about poverty, diseases, child mortality and illiteracy, and results in higher public support for that countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aid program. ii.

Use of polling data

Most communications teams in aid donor agencies and Ministries conduct public opinion and stakeholder surveys to assess levels of public awareness of and concern about development issues, public support for the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s foreign aid program, knowledge about the program, recognition of the agency implementing it, common criticisms of aid, and sources of information about development issues. These polling data is often at a level of generality that makes it difficult for communications managers to use them in a systematic way to inform the selection of messages and design of communications strategies. Still, most communications managers view basic opinion data as an essential benchmark on public attitudes that helps them identify key approaches to communications campaigns, and explain the logic of these approaches to management teams in their agencies and ministries. 16

Table 2 summarizes highlights from six public opinion polls on attitudes to ODA programs in the following countries: USA (USAID: U.S. Public Opinion on Development Assistance, 2003), United Kingdom (DFID: Public Attitudes towards Development, 2007), Sweden (SIDA: Swedish Viewpoints on Development Cooperation, 2005), Canada (CIDA: Canadian Attitudes toward Development Assistance, 2004), Poland (Poles about Development Assistance, 2007) as well as EU27 (Eurobarometer: Europeans and Development Aid, 2007). Table 2 – Key Findings - Opinion Survey Data on Attitudes to Development Aid

Sweden

USA

Level of Support 54% favor "giving economic aid to other nations" and support foreign aid as an important federal program. 81% of respondents were either very or fairly concerned about poverty in developing countries; 37% of people had heard of DFID.

More than 80% agree wholly or partly with the statement "I think it is important that Sweden contributes towards development in poor countries".

Key Themes

Reasons for Support

What/Why Oppose

84% favor giving "food and medical assistance to people in needy countries"; 74% favor "Aid that helps needy countries develop their economies"; 80% favor "Aid for women's education in poor countries to reduce population growth". The vast majority of respondents thought that reducing malaria, HIV/AIDS and other major diseases was very important (92%); Nearly as many thought that the following were very important: reducing the number of children who die before they are five (91%), that all children should be able to go to school (90%), reducing the number of women dying as a result of childbirth (88%) and men and women having access to family planning services (83%). Top five “sectors and themes” where “you would like to direct development cooperation”: schools and education (76%); health and medical care (72%); disasters, war or conflict (52%); democratic development (48%); infrastructure (47%).

71% agree "...best for the future of our country if we take an active part in world affairs rather than stay out".

48% would "cut back economic aid to other nations".

About three quarters thought that reducing the number of people living in extreme poverty (77%) and reducing damage to the environment (75%) was very important

53% of respondents thought the UK Government’s commitment to poverty reduction in developing countries was too little; 41% said that they agreed with the statement ‘some people have said that most aid to developing (poor) countries is wasted’.

A vast majority (roughly 70%) are confident that Swedish development cooperation does contribute to a better world.

Around 40% agree completely or partly with the statement “Sweden has its own problems that should be solved first, then we can start thinking about other countries”.

Canada Poland Europe - EU 27

A majority (78%) currently support Canada’s aid program; 77% feel that giving money to international or Canadian organizations working in poor countries are the most effective ways for Canada to help people in poor countries.

Ensuring that developing countries get a fair price in international markets for their products (96%), and helping poor countries reduce the possibility of armed conflict and war (92%) are seen as the most important actions; 74% named cancelling the debts that developing countries owe to rich countries as an important issue; 72% agree that Canada should build up the capacity of the private sector in poor countries so that poor countries can compete in the global marketplace.

77% of respondents say Poland should support the development of underdeveloped countries

With regards to the greatest challenges for the developing countries, Poles choose contagious diseases including HIV/AIDS (65%), no access to potable water (43%), as well as military and various domestic conflicts (40%). The areas named as those where Poland could offer most to poor countries are improving quality of education (49%), improving situation in health service (39%); and crisis prevention and reconstruction after conflicts (20%). Fighting extreme poverty and hunger is seen as the priority by 66%; Combating the spread of HIV and AIDS, malaria and other diseases is also ranked among top priorities (46%); Around a third of respondents recognize universal primary education (34%), ensuring environmental sustainability (32%) and reducing child mortality (31%) as top priorities.

80% of Europeans are not familiar with the MDGs; Europeans believe that European institutions should lead the decision making on development aid (The European Commission-32% and The European Parliament-28%), but national governments are seen to have a say (26%).

For 60%, helping people in need, the moral obligation to help and the duty of a rich country are seen as the main reasons for Canada to have an aid program; 30% view the aid program as contributing to Canada’s reputation and economy, and to international peace and stability; 45% believe that there would be less war and terrorism if Canada and other rich countries were more generous about providing aid to poor countries Majority of respondents point to the moral obligation to aid poorer countries (60%) and the need to return the assistance Poland received in the past (41%); a growing number of Poles convinced that helping other countries will bring considerable benefit to the Polish State by building up its prestige abroad (25%).

Overwhelming majority (82%) agrees that “much of the aid given to poor countries never gets to the people who need it most”.

Self-interest (e.g., enabling poor countries to buy more products from rich countries) (28%) and contribution global stability (28%) are main motivations for giving aid; Also such reasons as: democracy and good governance (22%); avoiding citizens of these countries emigrating to rich countries (20%); preventing & avoiding favorable conditions for terrorism (19%); gaining political allies (15%).

The majority (53%) say that that the best way to improve the efficiency of EU development aid is to guarantee a fair distribution of aid according to need and to ensure transparency.

Most of respondents ill-disposed towards Polish aid programme say the state cannot afford to assist poorer countries (68%) and that we should address our domestic problems in the first place (45%).

Over time, opinion surveys on development aid have produced remarkably consistent results. An extensive review of such surveys by the OECD-DAC Development Centre found that, “public support (in DAC donor countries) for helping poor countries has remained consistently high for almost two decades; there is no aid fatigue.”19 19

McDonnell, Solignac Lecomte & Wegimont, Public Opinion and the Fight against Poverty, OECD-DAC, Paris, 2003, p. 10.

Other observations in the same review are borne out by subsequent polls, including: • • • • • • • iii.

Public donations to development and emergency NGOs have been increasing in reaction to emergencies and natural disasters in developing countries. Concern about aid effectiveness coexists with continued high support for aid. Countries where support for aid is strongest tend to have higher ODA-toGNI ratios. While support for ODA is high, public understanding of development issues is shallow and superficial. Education, public awareness campaigns, public debate and media focus tend to raise the level of public awareness, but spending on these programs remains low. Most respondents say they get their information about development and aid from the media, especially TV news. Better-educated, young and urban-dwelling respondents are stronger supporters of development aid.

Level of spending on ODA and proportion devoted to public information and communications

What is the appropriate level of spending on information, communications and development education by donor-country governments? Overall, among OECD-DAC donors, total communications spending is about €200 million, or 0.26 percent of their total ODA.20 Behind this average, the range is quite vast, as can be seen in the table below. The Netherlands, for example, devotes almost four percent of its ODA to communications & awareness-raising, whereas Australia allocates only .08 percent to these activities.

McDonnell & Solignac Lecomte, “MDGs, Taxpayers and Aid Effectiveness,” Policy Insights No.13, OECD Development Centre, 2005, p. 4

iv.

distribution of communications resources (distinctions between corporate communications and global/development education)

Among the donors reviewed in this paper, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom stand out in allocating the largest share of aid communications resources to “development education” or “global education”. Germany devotes €10 million to education, in contrast to just €1 million to “public information and communications,” while Sweden’s €13 million development education budget is almost twice the €7.6 million SIDA devotes to corporate communications. 21 DFID also allocates the largest share—80 percent, or £20 million—of its communications resources to development education, with only £5 million allocated to “corporate communications”. Although the volume of DFID’s spending devoted to communications has roughly doubled since 2004, this distribution has been sustained.22 An example of DFID’s development education activities is its annual £1.5 million Development Awareness Fund, which provides grants to organizations and individuals proposing projects that promote public knowledge and understanding of development issues.23 Among the broader community of OECD donors, others with a similar distribution of resources include Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Ireland. The United States, by contrast, spends nothing on “development education,” as this activity is seen as being too close to “political advocacy” for which taxpayers’ money cannot be used under US law. Some analysts suggest that this absence of development education spending partly explains the lower levels of public support for development aid found in US opinion surveys, in contrast to most European countries.24 While Canada and Japan devote a larger proportion of their resources to corporate communications than to development education, both have sustained innovative development education efforts. The Canadian International Development Agency’s Development Information Program, launched in 1984, provides funds to documentary filmmakers, television producers, and radio and print journalists, to develop feature reports on development issues. A recent evaluation of this program found that its media products reached individual citizens about 63 million times between 2003-06. The same program also provides financing to school boards and teachers’ federations to produce educational materials for use in the classroom; the same evaluation estimated that its products reached 1.2 million teachers and students.25 The Japanese International Cooperation Agency, like CIDA, also has a program to create and distribute educational material on development to schools. In addition, it reaches out 21

Ibid Ibid, and interview with DFID official. 23 See DFID website for criteria 24 Lancaster & Van Dusen, Organizing U.S. Foreign Aid – Confronting the Challenges of the 21st Century, Brookings Institution Press, 2005, p. 40. 25 Evaluation of the Development Information Program, (Canadian International Development Agency, 2007). 22

to middle and high school students with an annual essay contest on development, the winners of which are invited to tour JICA programs and projects in Africa, along with a group of teachers.26 v.

Involvement of civil society organizations in communications

A key conceptual conclusion in this discussion of approaches to communicating foreign aid to domestic audiences is that there is a need to involve civil society, including both the for-profit private sector and voluntary organizations, in these communications activities. The reasons for this include: • • • •

many of them are natural partners in delivery of the aid program; they are essential to its success, and will welcome opportunities to advocate on behalf of their work in partnership with the government opinion surveys in many countries show that development NGOs are more credible advocates of development aid than government officials and politicians by working with civil society organizations (CSOs) on aid communications, the government can achieve more impact by combining its resources with those of CSOs public consultation of civil society on the aid program will bolster their support for it, while also engaging larger audiences in the development debate

Canada, Japan and Sweden, among others, hold consultations and host research seminars on development with the participation of informed civil society organizations and experts. Canada has a long-established International Development Research Centre (IDRC), that supports development-related research in developing countries’ universities and institutes; IDRC organizes public events to highlight this work. Canada also holds annual consultation events involving CIDA and the country’s major manufacturers and exporters’ group, as well as with a national organization of development NGOs. Media are invited to these events, which also feature expert speakers and public exhibits. Canada’s CIDA also holds an annual International Development Week in early February, during which development NGOs and other CSOs organize events including exhibits, conferences, lectures and film-showings across the country to highlight their activities. In the 1990s, the Japanese government created several organizations to do research and training in development, and to act as centres for public discussion of development issues, for example the Foundation for the Advanced Study of Development (FASID). It also launched an annual “International Cooperation Festival” in Tokyo, provided funding to local governments to launch international development activities, and provided information on development to those developing school curricula. Japan has also held numerous conferences involving partners both at home and abroad. For example, Japan has hosted a series of Tokyo International Conferences on African Development, as well as a 2002 conference with 10 ASEAN countries, as well as China and Korea, on 26

Interview.

Initiatives for Development in East Asia.27 In 2006, Japan hosted the World Bank’s Annual Conference on Development Economics, following many European donors who had earlier done the same. Sweden’s MDG Campaign from 2002-06 was built on partnerships and collaboration with an 85-member “network of actors” of Swedish civil society, private sector, unions, researchers and universities. Sweden’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) both work regularly with a Civil Society Center on Development. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also finances an “Expert Group on Development Issues” (EGDI), including Swedish and international experts, to advise the government on its development policies. 4. REVIEW OF MULTILATERAL DONORS’ COMMUNICATIONS As mentioned in section 2, multilateral development institutions also devote significant resources to communications, to highlight their key messages to target audiences as part of the institutions’ overall effort to deliver on their mandates and missions. The largest of all development institutions is the World Bank Group. Its communications program has expanded—in reach, variety and sophistication—since the early 1990s. This more assertive communications effort, including intensified outreach to civil society, the media, private sector and parliamentarians, as well as expanded web presence, was prompted by a perceived need to respond to mounting protests against the Bank, in rich and poor countries, that placed the institution’s credibility at risk. In 1994, Mark Malloch Brown, then the Bank’s Vice President of External Affairs, commissioned a survey of opinion-leaders in key donor countries; the survey found that a significant proportion of respondents perceived the Bank to be too single-mindedly focused on applying “Washington Consensus” policies, as well as arrogant, and insufficiently transparent. This survey coincided with the 50th annual World Bank-IMF meetings in Madrid, at which a newly-formed protest group, “Fifty Years is Enough”, staged highprofile demonstrations seeking “transformation” of the Bretton Woods institutions. Chastened by the survey results, the Bank began to invest more heavily in communications, an approach that was endorsed by James D. Wolfensohn, who became Bank president in 1995. By 1998, a similar survey found that perceptions of the Bank had improved. Of course, by the late 1990s, the Bank was under attack again, this time from the US government, whose representative criticized its approach during the East Asian financial crisis of 1997-98. In 1999 and 2000, the anti-globalization movement was in full swing, with huge street protests organized at all major Bank meetings. The shrill public debate around the Bank, from both official and unofficial voices, made an aggressive communications effort by the Bank an absolute necessity—and a permanent fixture.

Lancaster, pp. 124-5.

Today, the Bank’s communications strategy, like those of national governments, seeks to explain, promote and defend the integrity of its six thematic objectives, its action in pursuing them, and its accomplishment—in partnership with client and shareholdergovernments, civil society and others—of development results. The six strategic themes defining the Bank’s work are: 1) bring low-income countries into the global economy; 2) support reconstruction in fragile and conflict-affected states; 3) fight poverty and inequity in middle-income countries; 4) promote development in the Arab world; 5) support, analysis, leadership and action on global/regional public goods; and 6) create and share knowledge and learning, on good governance and anti-corruption, among others. Under this rubric, the Bank’s communications framework is four-fold: 1) to clarify and consistently communicate a coherent brand; 2) to use the six strategic directions to spotlight change and innovation; 3) to strengthen and demonstrate World Bank Group results; 4) to market the Bank’s “brain trust”, that is, its knowledge. As an international organization, with a vast range of stakeholders having diverse interests, ideological perspectives and agendas, the World Bank’s communications efforts are based on these organizing principles: • communications is rooted in everything we do • be transparent • sustain two-way dialogues; listen as well as speak • be inclusive but disciplined • be selective (on key issues, messages and campaigns) • be analysis and data-driven • focus on results These principles are applied as the Bank’s communications activities reach a variety of audiences, with the type of communications products tailored to each of them. The audiences include: • • • • • •

Opinion leaders in developing and developed countries (media, academics, think tanks, activists, etc.) Decision makers – national and local (government officials, parliamentarians, central bankers) Development partners (donors, foundations, multilateral development banks, operational NGOs, capital market participants, private sector) Project-level stakeholders “Goodwill” constituencies (researchers, students, business people, entrepreneurs, engaged citizens, etc.) Non-traditional web audiences

To deliver on this ambitious communications framework, the Bank relies on an External Affairs department headed by a Vice-President, and on a Bank-wide “Communications Network”, with over 276 staff members—3.2 percent of all World Bank staff—and another 350 consultants and others affiliated to the network, spread across the Bank’s networks and regional offices in over 100 countries. This network includes professionals

with backgrounds in strategic communications and marketing, media, publishing, website development and management, diplomatic relations, video production, and event and exhibit planning. The Bank’s communications operation is investing in strengthening its web presence by developing new functionalities including online broadcasting, blogs, and multilingual capacity, as the website is an essential platform for all other communications activities. The Bank has also carried out narrowly-targeted campaigns such as that to support the 16th replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA), the Bank’s concessional lending facility. This campaign, ultimately successful, was a concerted effort to ensure that key donors increased their commitments to IDA. It involved preparing and distributing online and printed country reports focused on results achieved with IDA loans, and extensive work explaining the benefits of IDA to key decisionmakers in donor government ministries, as well as to parliamentarians. Multilateral organizations’ communications efforts are often tightly-focused on achieving donor commitments and resource transfers to support internationally-agreed goals for which the organization is partly accountable. For this reason, the communications function is often explicitly connected to the “resource mobilization” function; the World Food Program, for example, has a department entitled “External Affairs and Resource Development.” The table below provides a summary overview of the policy priorities, key messages and campaigns of major multilateral development organizations. Country World Bank Group

Policy Priorities

Key Messages

World Bank’s Six Strategic Themes (based on the UN MDGs): (1) Help overcome poverty and spur sustainable growth in the poorest countries, especially in Africa; (2) Address the special challenges of states coming out of conflict; (3) Develop a competitive menu of “development solutions” for middle income countries, involving customized services as well as finance; (4) Play an active role with regional and global “public goods” on issues crossing national borders, including climate change, HIV/Aids, malaria, and aid for trade; (5) Support those advancing development and opportunity in the Arab world; (6) Foster a “knowledge and learning” agenda across the World Bank Group to support its role as a “brain trust” of applied experience.

IBRD & IDA: Working for a World Free of Poverty; “It is the vision of the World Bank Group to contribute to an inclusive and sustainable globalization – to overcome poverty, enhance growth with care for the environment, and create individual opportunity and hope” (Robert B. Zoellick, WB President); Mission: To fight poverty with passion and professionalism for lasting results; to help people help themselves and their environment by providing resources, sharing knowledge, building capacity and forging partnerships in the public and private sectors; Campaigns: ‘Overcoming the Food Price Crisis’ (10 Point Plan); International Development Association (IDA) is the part of WB that specifically helps the world’s poorest countries; World Bank Institute (WBI) helps countries share and apply global and local knowledge to meet development challenges.

UNDP

UN Development Programme is the UN's global development network, an organization advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. UNDP’s network links and coordinates global and national efforts to reach the UN MDGs; its focus is helping countries build and share solutions to the challenges of: (1) Democratic Governance; (2) Poverty Reduction; (3) Crisis Prevention and Recovery; (4) Environment and Energy; (5) HIV/AIDS. UNDP helps developing countries attract and use aid effectively. In all its activities, UNDP encourage the protection of human rights and the empowerment of women.

WFP

UN World Food Program works to put hunger at the centre of the international agenda, promoting policies, strategies and operations that directly benefit the poor and hungry. Among the UN MDGs, halving the proportion of hungry people in the world is top of the list. WFP operations aim to: (1) Save lives in refugee crises and other emergencies; (2) Improve nutrition and quality of life of world's most vulnerable people at critical times in their lives; (3) Enable development by (a) helping people build assets that benefit them directly; (b) promoting the self-reliance of poor people and communities. UN International Children's Emergency Fund is mandated by UN General Assembly to advocate for the protection of children's rights, to help meet their basic needs and to expand their opportunities to reach their full potential. Focus Areas: (1) Young child survival and development; (2) Basic education and gender equality; (3) Children and HIV and AIDS; (4) Child protection from violence, exploitation and abuse; (5) Policy advocacy and partnerships for children's rights. “Sixty years of experience tell us that we can turn back child mortality and meet UN MDGs by 2015.”

UNICEF

WHO

World Health Organization is the directing and coordinating authority for health within the UN system. It is responsible for providing leadership on global health matters, shaping the health research agenda, setting norms and standards, articulating evidence-based policy

UNDP: A world of development experience; “Protection and promotion of the universal values of the rule of law, human rights and democracy are ends in themselves, which are essential for a world of justice, opportunity and stability. No security agenda and no drive for development will be successful unless they are based on the sure foundation of respect for human dignity” (Kofi Annan); UNDP advocates for nationally-owned solutions to reduce poverty and promote human development; Campaigns: Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery specifically address disaster risk reduction, conflict prevention and peace-building, justice and security sector reform, gender equality and other issues; UNDP, co-sponsor of UNAIDS, helps countries put HIV/AIDS at the centre of national development and poverty reduction strategies. WFP: The world's frontline organisation fighting hunger; Disaster to Development; Finding the Hungry, Meeting their Needs; Breaking out of the Poverty Trap; WFP is the world's largest international food assistance organisation combating hunger in underdeveloped nations with severe food shortages. Mission: WFP uses its food to meet emergency needs and support economic & social development. WFP also provides the logistics support necessary to get food to the right people at the right time and in the right place; Campaigns: ‘Cyclone Nargis: Reaching the Survivors’ (currently in Myanmar) and others. UNICEF: Unite for Children; Working for health, education, equality and protection for every child; Improve the lives of individual children around the world; Building a protective environment for children; Bringing children's rights to the centre of public policy; Why we do it: Because -Children have rights; -The world has set goals for children; Children demand a voice; -Poverty reduction starts with children; -The people of the world say 'Yes' for children; -Children should not be dying from preventable causes; Campaigns: ‘Unite for Children, Unite against AIDS’; ‘Voices of Youth’; Goodwill ambassadors; Junior 8 Summit; and others. WHO: Working for Health; WHO works to ensure that everyone has access to quality health care; In the 21st century, health is a shared responsibility, involving equitable access to essential care and collective defense against transnational threats; “I want my

options, providing technical support to countries and monitoring and assessing health trends. Three of the eight UN MDGs – cutting child deaths, improving maternal health, and combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases – are directly about health. A sixpoint agenda to improve public health: (1) Promoting development; (2) Fostering health security; (3) Strengthening health systems; (4) Harnessing research, information and evidence; (5) Enhancing partnerships; (6) Improving performance. Global Fund

The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria was created to dramatically increase resources to fight three of the world's most devastating diseases, and to direct those resources to areas of greatest need. As a partnership between governments, civil society, the private sector and affected communities, the Global Fund represents an innovative approach to international health financing.

ADB

The Asian Development Bank is an international development finance institution whose mission is to help its developing member countries reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of their people. ADB follows three complementary strategic agendas: (1) inclusive growth, (2) environmentally sustainable growth, and (3) regional integration.

leadership to be judged by the impact of our work on the health of two populations: women and the people of Africa." (Dr Margaret Chan, Director-General); Campaigns: 'The Health Action in Crises' team specifically works to minimize suffering and death in all crisis situations, particularly, in Asia; International Health Regulations (IHR),negotiated by WHO’s Member States, establish rules that countries must follow to identify disease outbreaks and stop them from spreading; Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health. Investing in our Future; AIDS: Over 5 years, with Global Fund resources 1.8 million people are projected to receive antiretroviral treatment; 62 million will be reached with voluntary counseling and testing services for HIV prevention. Tuberculosis: Fund grants help detect 5 million cases of infectious tuberculosis; cure 3 million people through the internationally approved DOTS treatment strategy; 24,000 new treatments of multi-drug resistant tuberculosis. Malaria: The Fund helps finance 109 million bed nets to protect families from transmission of malaria; deliver 264 million combination drug treatments for resistant malaria. ADB: Fighting poverty in Asia and the Pacific; “Our Vision - an Asia and Pacific Free of Poverty”; Asia and Pacific is home to two-thirds of the world's extremely poor; ADB’s projects, programs, policies, and strategies give importance to the areas which aim to improve people's lives, especially the 621 million in Asia living on less than $1 per day; Campaigns: Asian Development Fund (IDF), funded by ADB's donor countries, offers low-interest loans and grants to help reduce poverty in ADB's poorest countries; Asia Regional Integration Center (ARIC); Asian Development Bank Institute: Sharing development knowledge about Asia and the Pacific.

5. WORKING WITH THE MEDIA Opinion polls across many countries consistently show that the news media, especially television news, are the predominant and most trusted source of information about development issues for the public in donor countries. In the UK, for example, a 2006 poll found that 76 percent of people learned about overseas aid to Africa from TV news, while 47 percent said they found this information in newspapers and magazines.28 Meantime, a 2007 Eurobarometer survey of citizens of the new EU member states found that journalists were the most trusted source of information about development aid and developing countries; they were cited by 39 percent of respondents, followed by the European Commission at 24 percent, NGOs at 12 percent, and the domestic governments at 11 percent.29 Because the news media are the most effective means of reaching large audiences, most donor agencies’ communications operations allocate as much as half of their resources to media relations. While significant gains can be achieved with effective media relations, this area is also fraught with risks and challenges. First, communications managers in many donor countries describe the media as “uninterested” in development most of the time, except when there is a major disaster that involves an emergency response, or a “scandal” involving misuse, waste or theft of aid funds, or bungling of an aid project. “The journalists’ view of aid is as being opaque, corrupt or wasted,” said a Japanese aid communications manager. “The US press is interested only if it is bleeding,” commented a senior manager at USAID. And at DFID, a communications manager complained that there is not a single journalist in the UK who covers development. Even so, because media are influential, and because they often pursue negative stories that threaten to damage the credibility of the aid program and the “brand” of the development agencies, communications managers agree that a sound strategy, backed by skilled staff, is needed to handle media relations. About half of DFID’s 75 communications staff members are assigned to media relations, and much of their work is reactive, responding to questions posed by journalists.30 Because communications shops in aid agencies, as in other government departments, are often inundated with media calls and requests every day, most have developed a media relations or spokesperson policy that balances the need to maintain control over messages going to media, with the need to respond quickly to questions by giving journalists access to the best-informed spokesperson, depending on the issue being discussed. These policies typically involve a system of approvals by the press office and other ranking official(s) for interviews, a roster of spokespersons/experts, and media interview training 28

Office for National Statistics, Public Attitudes Towards Development (op.cit.), p. 73. European Commission, Directorate General – Communication, Special Eurobarometer 286/Wave 67.3TNS Opinion & Social, “Citizens of the new EU Member States and Development Aid”, September 2007, p. 19. 30 Interview. 29

for these spokespersons. (See Canada’s Government Communications Policy, or DFID’s Media Relations Procedures.) Most donor agencies also conduct outreach activities with journalists, organizing tours of developing countries with site visits of donor-supported projects, and seminars for media on development issues. This is aimed at raising awareness and understanding of development issues among journalists, so as to build a “critical mass” of media representatives who grasp the importance of development challenges and who will therefore support the development agency’s effort. Media tours of projects can be effective, but they require sensitive management. A Japanese official notes that the most successful format is support for individual journalists to go on tours alone, rather than as part of a group with the same itinerary. “On group tours, we found that because all the journalists are exposed to the same information, they don’t produce any stories,” he said. As a result, JICA, like CIDA’s Development Information Program, provides travel grants to individual journalists, from both national and local media in Japan’s 47 provinces, to cover Japanese development aid efforts in the field. To ensure the success of such tours, the official said, much depends on the quality of advance work by JICA field staff.31 The UK’s DFID also has a similar program to support mainstream television and radio producers seeking to create feature documentaries on development issues.32 In addition to these special efforts, press offices track calls of journalists to identify those who show interest in development, and then send these journalists electronic newsletters suggesting story ideas, success stories, visits by development partners, relevant conferences, and so on. Some donors, such as the US and Japan, place communications officers in their overseas missions in developing countries to handle requests from visiting journalists or reporters posted in these countries. In most countries, the media are not monolithic. They include mass media, such as nationwide TV and radio and major daily newspapers. They also include regional and local media, and many communications managers, notably in Japan, Canada and Sweden, obtain more positive coverage of their programs by pitching stories to this latter group. 6. ORGANIZING THE COMMUNICATIONS FUNCTION For many donors, the organization of the development assistance function itself is fragmented, with leadership divided among ministries with different mandates, interests and agendas. This fragmentation—combined with the fact that finance and foreign affairs ministers usually outrank and carry greater influence than development aid ministers in most countries— affects the communications function and messaging for aid programs.

Interview Commonwealth Broadcasters Association-DFID Progamme Development and Travel Bursary Funds: http://www.cba.org.uk/CBA-DFID/index.php 32

In the US, for example, the Treasury Department manages relations with the World Bank and the IMF; the State Department deals with foreign policy and foreign relations, including some aid; the US Agency for International Development (USAID) manages foreign and humanitarian aid; another government agency, Peace Corps, sends cooperants abroad; while a relatively new organization, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, also finances poverty reduction projects in developing countries. A similar situation obtains in Japan, where the Ministries of Finance, Foreign Affairs, Trade and Industry share leadership of the aid program with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), as well as the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC). In Germany, the Ministry of Development (BMZ) provides direction to GTZ, the German technical assistance agency; KfW, which provides capital assistance on a semiconcessional basis and InWEnt, which provides training. A combination of a strong Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development, Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, and multiple pro-development interest groups outside government have enabled the Ministry of Development (BMZ) to carry the day in insisting on a development focus for German aid.33 In Canada, the Canadian International Development Agency, headed by its own Minister of International Cooperation, leads on development assistance, but defers on foreign policy priorities to the Foreign Affairs Department and on the World Bank and IMF to the Finance Department, both of whose Ministers are more powerful than the CIDA Minister. To overcome or prevent the fragmentation of aid programs, as well as the bureaucratic rivalries and disparate agendas that often cause it, most donors have established a separate international development agency to manage the aid program. Almost always, this agency remains lower in the Ministerial hierarchy than the Foreign Affairs and Finance Ministriesâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;and must, consequently, seek these latter Ministriesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; guidance and/or approval for policy or spending initiatives. Still, having a distinct agency, with its own budget and mandate, ensures a degree of protection from outside interference for the development aid programâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s poverty focus and integrity of purpose; this is made stronger by a legislated mandate for such an agency. These agencies, in turn, usually have a communications operation. At the Canadian International Development Agency, the Communications Branch, is headed by a Director General, who leads about 85 staff members. The Branch is divided into three groups, each headed by a Director, namely: 1. Corporate Communications & Media Relations This unit develops and implements all public events and announcements involving the Minister and, where appropriate, other senior CIDA officials. It prepares speeches, promotional material and news releases, and responds to all media calls on 33

Lancaster, p. 189.

behalf of the Agency. It also develops communications strategies and plans to position the Minister in consultation with his/her political staff. It also includes an internal communications unit. Staff number is about 30. 2. Outreach This group manages CIDA’s Outreach programs, including the Development Information Program, which includes three sub-programs, namely the Mass Media Initiative (which supports production of films for broadcast on television), the Journalists in Development program (which organizes overseas tours for journalists), and the Global Classroom Initiative (which finances the production of pedagogical materials on development for schools and teachers). Outreach also manages a program to send CIDA staff and partners on speaking tours across Canada, organizes International Development Week, as well as a program to reach out to Parliamentarians. It organizes conferences on development issues, and includes a unit that responds to questions from the public by telephone and email. Staff number is about 30, about six of whom are located in regional offices across Canada. 3. Planning, Research & Creative Services This division has three units. The first is a three-person research unit that supports the Director General—and the division’s Director—in leadership of the strategic communications planning process, by managing opinion polling, as well as gathering development results from program staff, providing analysis and advice on communications dimensions of Agency-wide issues, producing CIDA’s annual report, and interacting with external actors such as the OECD-DAC development communications network. A second unit manages the Communications Branch’s financial and human resources, information technology and records-keeping, as well as procurement and contracting. The third unit manages production of published materials, including the Agency’s external and internal website, brochures, information kits and publicity materials, posters, maps, and presentations. It provides writing and editing services, as well as translation (Canada has two official languages, English and French) and revision. About 30 staff. 7.

COMUNICATIONS STRATEGY FOR RUSSIA’S ODA: ISSUES TO CONSIDER i. Guidelines

The experience of established donors suggests that the following guidelines should be kept in mind in developing a communications strategy and plan for Russia’s aid program: • Need for coherence and consistency between messages and content of aid programs • Need to have information on public attitudes, so as to align messages with them, or seek to shift public opinion on key issues such as poverty, malnutrition and child mortality, HIV/AIDS, malaria, climate change, illiteracy, and inequality between men and women • Importance of credibility built on a proven record of honesty and trust

• • ii.

Development results must be part of the message. Need to identify and engage stakeholders in the emerging aid program, including NGOs, universities, and the private sector Specific questions

• • •

How does Russia want to position its ODA program? What are the communications implications (the implied messages, for example) emerging from the directions outlined in the concept note? Given that messages must reflect Russian government policy and connect with public attitudes, what messages would achieve this?  Some ideas:  Russia as compassionate nation: ‘fighting poverty and helping the poor’ (Nordic model, MDGs)  Russia as constructive global player: ‘promoting development, peace & cooperation’ (UK, Canada model)  Russia as leader: ‘promote free markets, democracy, fight terrorism (USA model)  Russia as “good neighbor”: building bridges of cooperation with countries in its Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Once this is done, a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis should be undertaken to address questions, including: • • • •

What is public opinion on development? What are Russians’ main sources of information on these subjects? What is the media environment for development messages? What are the gaps in knowledge and awareness among media? Who are the stakeholders, partners and potential partners for communicating the aid program? What are the risks involved in communicating about development in Russia?

iii. Media environment Russian media coverage of philanthropic, charity, development and social aid issues has been extensive and diverse in recent years, suggesting that these media could deliver supportive coverage of Russia’s ODA activities. The coverage reflects a number of aid-related issues; for example, the media present public opinion survey results (by Russian and foreign research firms), discuss moral issues, share international (primarily US, European, and UN) experience in development aid, provide opinions of experts in the field and describe involvement of famous people (government officials, businessmen, celebrities, etc.) in charity activities. Some newspapers invite readers to be volunteers, engage in social work, or help those in need, reflecting service and humanitarianism as a desirable social value.

Russian celebrities’ endorsements of development aid are surfacing in the media, and could prove effective in building support for it, as they have done in other donor countries. See, for example, messages from actors Tatyana Lazareva and Chulpan Khamatova: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8934449565703780704, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1929870768855103930&hl=en). At the same time, there is skepticism in the media too, as recent surveys (VCIOM, 2007) indicate that about 50 percent of Russians do not participate in any philanthropy, charity, development or other social aid activities. Officers of Russian charitable foundations said the institutional basis for social development aid organizations in the country is weak, suggesting that tax incentives are insufficient; they seek improvements to the system.34 Still, a solid foundation for public support for development aid exists: one survey found that 56 percent of respondents want the Government to encourage charitable activities, while another 40 percent would be willing to work as volunteers in such organizations.35 iv. Web outreach A recent survey (FOM, Winter 2007/08) shows that 30.6 million, or 27 percent of Russians over 18, are Internet-users. Most are well-educated, middle-income residents of large cities. Websites devoted to philanthropy, charity, development and social aid on Runet (Russian Internet) include: www.helpchildren.ru; forum Поможем вместе on www.eva.ru; www.donors.ru; www.otkazniki.ru; www.sosdeti.ru; www.nastenka.ru; www.fondsozidanie.narod.ru; www.donatenow.ru; www.childrenshearts.ru; www.detskiedomiki.ru; www.blago.ru; www.pomogi.org; and others. Also, several online communities in the Russian segment of Livejournal (popular among young and middle-aged people in Russia), include: deti_life, donors, help_save_child, nastenka_fund, nuzhna_pomosch, rdkb, rentgenorad, ru_adopt, vmeste_smozhem. Opportunities to reach target audiences on Runet have great potential. A future website on Russian ODA could provide information on development aid-related issues, disseminate a newsletter, develop a forum for online discussions, etc. v. Access to information The Federal Act on Information, Information Technologies and Protection of Information (2006) includes section 7 on “Free access to information” (Federalniy zakon …, 2006). […] According to current legislation, governmental information is open to the public, and by its nature it is intended for the public domain.36

(RBK TV, 2007) VCIOM, 2006, 2008. 36 (Trushina, I., Corruption and transparency in Russia: The anticorruption role of libraries, p. 16; http://www.ifla.org/faife/report/ifla-faife_world_report_2007-article-trushina.pdf; http://www.rg.ru/2006/07/29/informacia-dok.html). 35

vi. Private sector involvement The Charities Aid Foundation (UK) reports that private companies in Russia annually spend more on philanthropy, charity and social aid activities than those in many Western countries (US$1.5 billion or 17 percent of total profits), despite the fact that tax breaks for businesses participating in charitable activities were cancelled in 2002. In 2007, the Government created a new incentive for philanthropy by allowing state institutions to be named in honor of individuals who provide the financing for these institutions. This was proposed by the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation to promote business support for philanthropy. Dimitry Medvedev, then Deputy Prime Minister, publicly supported this decision emphasizing that it would encourage civil society development in Russia.37 Surveys also indicate that Russian entrepreneurs show strong support for corporate social responsibility, while 64 percent of Russians say the government should regulate social responsibility and accountability of Russian business.38 Also, Russian entrepreneurs themselves and the general public believe that business should provide financial assistance to the most vulnerable social groups (41 percent and 53 percent respectively), as well as material resources for health services, education, and culture (33 percent and 39 percent respectively).39 vii. Civil society engagement Public pressure from civil society organizations was decisive in influencing the Government’s decision to declare 2006 the Year of Philanthropy in Russia. These organizations included the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, which consists of public figures, including civil society leaders, academia, and artists.40 They also include the Committee for Philanthropy Development, which is involved in diverse activities (for examples, it proposed an award system for philanthropists and NGOs whose social aid work has contributed to Russia’s development (e.g., charitable foundations Созидание, Подари жизнь!, among others). Most of these remain focused on domestic, rather than international, cooperation. Nonetheless, these organizations and representatives of the Public Chamber of Russia could form or cooperate with an Advisory Council, if such an institution were organized to support ODA program in Russia. viii. Youth participation and development education Seminars and conferences on philanthropy, charity, development and social aid are held from time to time in Russia. For example, a Round Table in Moscow, “Social Responsibility of the Russian Business—From Spontaneous Charity to Social Movement,” was organized by two federal newspapers Izvestia and Komsomolskaya Pravda (2006). A conference in St. Petersburg, Fundraising for Development of People, Organizations, Territories involved Russian and international experts (2007); a seminar in 37

Vzglyad, 2007. VCIOM, 2006. 39 VCIOM, 2008. 40 See www.oprf.ru 38

Moscow, “Philanthropy and Sponsorship—Investment in the Future,” was held by Komsomolskaya Pravda (2004). However, these activities rarely involve young participants. An international experience in the youth involvement in social aid programs could be applied in Russia (e.g., CIDA experience). Given relatively high public awareness of philanthropy, charity, development and social aid issues among state and private organizations, mass media, and the general public, there is a good basis for promotion of “development education” by the Government in schools and universities. The department, which would deal with ODA at the state level, could develop specific educational materials for teachers and disseminate them in schools. In their turn, schools could include elements of development education into existing courses (for example, in The World Around Us course, mandatory in public elementary schools in Russia) or even create a curriculum for a new courses in this area.

RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Develop an interim structure of leadership for the aid program in its development stage. This is important from a communications standpoint, as it enables identification of a key spokesperson for the government on development issues, and definition of the process through which the aid program will be shaped and defined. Include a results-monitoring & gathering unit, so that the Russian aid program is results-driven from the beginning.41 Over time, many donors have opted to set up a development agency; in some cases, such an agency is headed by a cabinet minister, while in others, it is headed by an official who reports to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and/or Finance. In any case, development aid is sufficiently complex that its management must have or acquire a level of expertise that usually requires significant institutional support. 2. Establish a permanent policy framework, or charter, defining the purpose of ODA. The UK has done this, basing its aid on the MDGs. So has Germany, with its Program of Action 2015. Canada’s Parliament has passed one, and Canada’s government—due to its failure to take leadership on this issue—must now live with a charter designed, to a large extent, by an Opposition Member of Parliament.42 A legally binding charter for development aid ensures policy coherence and continuity of objectives, protects the aid program’s integrity of purpose and often its budget, enables a sound system of goal-setting, monitoring, evaluation and results-reporting, all of which greatly improve the conditions for a communications program with clear and sustained messages. 3. Conduct opinion survey research. A benchmark survey of Russian attitudes towards development assistance is a critical starting point for this effort. Much time and change has passed since the Soviet era and its aid effort ended. It would be instructive for Russian aid managers to know the “initial conditions” of public opinion on development aid among Russian audiences, to develop appropriate messages, and address widely-held concerns, as well as gaps in knowledge about development. 4. Convene a consultation with stakeholders. This would provide critical inputs for an eventual aid program, while also identifying potential partners, stakeholders and advocates for Russia’s emerging development aid effort. It is also an effective way of launching a public discussion of these issues, and identifying the interests at play. 5. Plan a launch event for the aid program, along with a tour to explain it. Once the shape and scope of the aid program is defined, along with its areas of focus, countries of concentration and projected budget, the President or Minister responsible, could announce it in Moscow and highlight it with a tour of key countries of concentration. This could be timed around major international

41 42

The experience of the US Millennium Challenge Corporation is a useful example of this. See website for John McKay, MP (http://www.johnmckaymp.on.ca/nm-list.asp?thisnewscat=19)

meetings such as the UN General Assembly and/or the Annual Meetings of the World Bank and IMF. A major international conference, with prominent world experts on development, could also be held in Moscow, to provide a backdrop for the governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s launch of its new aid program. In addition to these recommendations, more detailed suggestions on the communications program include: 1. Invite communications experts from the OECD-DAC to advise communications staff in the departments responsible for Russiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aid. 2. Have key messages for the mandate, mission, key areas of focus and recipient countries for Russian development aid, and repeat them at every opportunity. 3. Create a website. A website is a vital tool in communicating what the aid program is doing, even in its early stages. It sends a message of transparency, and creates a platform for delivering messages to interested audiences, including media. Develop an electronic newsletter on the aid program and send it to key journalists. 4. Engage civil society organizations in the aid program and the communicating of it. 5. Establish a program to finance tours by journalists of development programs and projects, in which they agree to produce stories that are aired or published. 6. Draft a media spokesperson policy, and provide interview training to a roster of spokespersons who can explain Russian-supported aid programs to media, in the field and at home. 7. Create an internal communications unit for the aid program. Understanding and support for the aid program begins inside government, so an effort must be deployed to highlight the success of Russian aid efforts and the benefits this success delivers to Russiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role in the world.

Sources consulted & resources Websites of CIDA (Canada), DFID (United Kingdom), BMZ (Germany), USAID & Millennium Challenge Corporation (USA), SIDA (Sweden), Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Spain, Ministry of Foreign Affairs & JICA (Japan), the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, World Food Program, World Health Program, United Nations Development Program, Global Fund Against Malaria, AIDS and TB, and others. Website and documents of the OECD Development Centre and its secretariat to the Development Communications Network of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC). This Development Communications Network is made up of heads of communications and information for the development aid agencies and ministries of DAC-member donor countries. McDonnell, Ida, Solignac Lecomte, Henri-Bernard & Wegimont, Liam, Public Opinion and the Fight against Poverty, OECD Development Centre: Paris, 2003. Lancaster, Carol, Foreign Aid â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Diplomacy, Development, Domestic Politics, University of Chicago Press, London: 2007. OECD Development Centre, Policy Insights #2, Mobilising Public Opinion against Global Poverty, 2004. OECD Development Centre, Policy Insights #13, MDGs, Taxpayers and Aid Effectiveness, 2005. Opinion Polls, Communications Strategies & Plans of Development Organizations Interviews Tom Engel Director of Communications Strategy Department for International Development United Kingdom London +44-207-023-1032 T-Engel@dfid.gov.uk Henri-Bernard Solignac Lecomte Head of External Cooperation and Policy Dialogue OECD Development Centre Le Seine St Germain, Bat. B 12 boulevard des Iles 92130 Issy-les-Moulineaux France

MAIL ADDRESS: 2, rue Andre-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France Dev.Contact@oecd.org Telephone : +33 (0)1 45 24 82 89 Fax: +33 (0)1 44 30 61 49 Jeffrey Grieco Assistant Administrator for Legislative and Public Affairs Agency for International Development (USAID) Washington, DC (202) 712-4810 Aiichiro Yamamoto Resident Representative in the USA and Former Director of Communications Japan International Cooperation Agency 1776 I (Eye) Street NW, Suite 895 Washington, DC 20006 Tel: 202-293-2334 Fax: 202-293-9200 Susana de Funes Casellas Director General, Planning & Development Policy Evaluation Secretary of State for International Cooperation Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation for Spain Madrid (+34) 91.379.1828 susana.defunes@maec.es Joachim Beijmo Director General of Communications Swedish International Development Agency Stockholm +46 8 698 45 91 joachim.beijmo@sida.se Hans Dembowski Editor, D + C Development & Cooperation (E+Z Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit) Magazine of InWent, German Development Training & Capacity-Building Agency Berlin phone: (+49 69) 7501-4366, fax: (+49 69) 7501-4855 euz.editor@fsd.de Kate Dunn Afghanistan Program Communications Manager Canadian International Development Agency Gatineau, Quebec (Canada) (819) 994-6395 Kate_dunn@acdi-cida.gc.ca

ANNEXES 1.

EXAMPLES OF DEVELOPMENT ACTS & LAWS (UK, GERMANY, CANADA)

OPINION POLLS

ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS OF COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENTS IN AID AGENCIES & DESCRIPTIONS OF KEY FUNCTIONS (CANADA & UK)

JOB DESCRIPTIONS FOR COMMUNICATIONS STAFF (CANADA)

ANNEX 1 EXAMPLES OF DEVELOPMENT ACTS & LAWS

1. United Kingdom International Development Act 2002: An Overview 1. The International Development Act 2002 ("2002 Act") will come into effect on 17 June 2002, replacing the Overseas Development and Cooperation Act 1980 ("1980 Act"). Why is an Act needed at all? 2. Ministers can only spend public money for the purposes, and in the manner, authorized by Parliament. Where types of expenditure are made on a recurring basis it is customary for authority for these to be given in specific legislation. What the 2002 Act Covers 3. The 2002 Act will be the legal authority for most DFID expenditure. The two major exceptions will be all UK contributions to European Community assistance (other than contributions to the European Development Fund) and overseas pensions - which are both covered by separate Acts. Why We Have a New Act 4. The Government committed itself to considering a new Act in the 1997 White Paper Eliminating World Poverty. The idea received support from the development community during Development Policy Forums in 1998 and 1999. It was felt that the existing legislation (the 1980 Act) did not reflect DFIDâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s focus on poverty reduction and lay DFID open to pressures to give assistance for other purposes such as the policy of tying UK aid to British goods and services. It also meant that DFID was limited in the ways we could support private sector activity and had no specific authority to promote development awareness. The Key Parts 5. The 2002 Act sets out more clearly the purposes for which development aid can be given and increases the number of ways in which it can be provided. The Powers 6. The 2002 Act gives the authority to spend money through a number of different "powers". The most significant is the: Provision of development assistance which contributes to poverty reduction (the so-called "core" power) 7. The Act also enables the: Provision of development assistance to the UK Overseas Territories Provision of humanitarian assistance Contributions to Multilateral Development Banks

8. Supplementary powers are provided to assist in achieving the purposes of the Act. These include a power to support organisations or funds that contribute to international development. The "Core Power" 9. The 2002 Act establishes poverty reduction as the over-arching purpose of British development assistance, either by furthering sustainable development or promoting the welfare of people (Section 1 of the 2002 Act). "The Secretary of State may provide any person or body with development assistance if he is satisfied that the provision of the assistance is likely to contribute to a reduction in poverty. In this Act "development assistance" means assistance provided for the purpose of furthering sustainable development..., or improving the welfare of the population...(Section 1 (1) - (2)). In other words, two conditions need to be met, that a) assistance is provided for the purpose of furthering sustainable development or improving welfare, and b) that DFID is satisfied that the assistance will be likely to contribute to the reduction of poverty. To meet one of these conditions alone would not be enough. To meet the purpose test without being likely to contribute to poverty reduction would be to allow expenditure on schemes designed with good intentions regardless of their chance of having any impact. To have an impact on poverty without meeting the purpose test would be to allow policies, such as Aid Tying, which are pursued for non-developmental reasons. 10. The term "sustainable development" is clarified to prevent interpretations that have just an environmental or economic meaning: "... sustainable development includes any development that is, in the opinion of the Secretary of State, prudent having regard to the likelihood of its generating lasting benefits for the population of the country...in relation to which it is provided." (Section 1(3)) 11. The 1980 Act was open to broad interpretation. It allowed the Secretary of State to provide assistance with the purpose of â&#x20AC;&#x153;promoting the development or maintaining the economy of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom, or the welfare of its peopleâ&#x20AC;? This did not clearly set poverty reduction and development as the core objectives of the aid. 12. The 2002 Act is drafted in such a way that a policy such as Tied Aid (and the Aid and Trade Provision), in which assistance is given for the purpose of promoting UK trade or for other commercial or political reasons, would now be challengeable in the courts. The Overseas Territory Power 13. Development assistance to the UK Overseas Territories must seek to further sustainable development or promote the welfare of its people but is not subject to the over-arching requirement of contributing to the reduction of poverty (Section 2 of the 2002 Act). This is in recognition of the continuing special relationship between the UK and Overseas Territories The Humanitarian Power

14. A specific power has been given to enable the Secretary of State to provide assistance in time of disaster (Section 3 of the 2002 Act). The power is limited to assistance for the purpose of alleviating the effects of disasters, man-made or natural, or other emergencies, on the people of the country or territory concerned. This power is not subject to the requirement that it be given for the purpose of furthering sustainable development or promoting welfare, nor that it contribute to the reduction of poverty. Longer term assistance would have to be justified under the core power Contributions to Multilateral Development Banks 15. As in the 1980 Act, a specific power is given to make contributions to Multilateral Development Banks such as the World Bank (Section 11 of the 2002 Act). New Ways of Providing Development Assistance 16. The 2002 Act increases the number of ways in which development assistance can be provided (subject to the assistance being provided for the purpose of furthering sustainable development or promoting welfare and likely to contribute to the reduction of poverty): It enables the Secretary of State to provide not only grants or loans but also to give guarantees and purchase equities (or other company securities) (Section 6 of the 2002 Act). Specific guidance on the use of these new instruments and their use will issue shortly. It gives explicit power to support development awareness work (section 4(2)(c)). What Difference Does The Act Make in Practice? 17. The Act essentially reflects changes that have already occurred in UK development policy since 1997. Projects and programmes are already designed with the principal purpose of contributing to poverty reduction. The difference is that these changes are now reflected in law. The Act means that we should approve every development assistance project or programme explicitly on the basis that it is provided for the purpose of either furthering sustainable development or promoting the welfare of people and that it is likely to contribute to the reduction of poverty. The only exceptions are assistance to UK Overseas Territories, humanitarian assistance, and contributions to Multilateral Development Banks (see paragraphs 13-15 above).

2. Germany Aims and Principles & Program of Action 2015 The development policy of the Federal Republic of Germany is an independent area of German foreign policy. It is formulated by the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and carried out by the implementing organisations. The German government sees development policy as a joint responsibility of the international community, with Germany making effective and high-profile contributions. Germany has pledged to take an active part in realising the goals set out in the Millennium Declaration, the Monterrey Consensus and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation. The interdepartmental Program of Action 2015 is the German governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s principal instrument for implementing this pledge. It was adopted by the Federal German Cabinet only a few months after the Millennium Summit. In the Program 43

of Action 2015 the German government sets out the form its contribution will take within the overarching international framework for action, and how this is to be further developed. It will be guided in this by four guiding principles: • • • •

Reducing poverty worldwide Protecting the natural environment Building peace and realising democracy Promoting equitable forms of globalisation

Since it is in Africa that the greatest efforts are required to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, Germany’s engagement in Africa will be particularly strong. But other regions too will be able to count on Germany as a reliable partner. The German government intends to raise the effectiveness of German development policy in keeping with the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, through a clear international division of labour and good coordination with other donors. In future, Germany will be concentrating cooperation on some 60 partner countries. The BMZ therefore adopted a new list of countries in February 2008, detailing the 57 countries with which it will be engaging in development cooperation over the long term. A number of other countries will continue to receive support under regional programs or programs dealing with specific sectors. In 17 countries, ongoing programs will be completed as planned and bilateral development cooperation then brought to an end. Germany will spend on development cooperation annually a sum equivalent to 0.51 per cent of GNI from 2010 onwards, and a sum equivalent to 0.7 per cent of GNI from 2015 onwards, as provided for in the European Union’s step-by-step plan to raise ODA. The four guiding principles of German development policy Germany wants to help to: • reduce poverty worldwide • protect the natural environment • build peace and realise democracy, and • promote equitable forms of globalisation. Germany’s guiding vision here is one of globally sustainable development expressing itself in economic efficiency, social justice, ecological sustainability and political stability. These four guiding principles of German development policy are interlinked, mutually reinforcing and mutually limiting, and they are closely related to all the Millennium Development Goals. Reducing poverty worldwide Poverty reduction is the overarching task of German development policy. Germany’s activities in the field of poverty reduction are based on an extended notion of poverty, according to which poverty is not defined solely by low income, but is a complex state of life, characterised by need, vulnerability, injustice and a lack of prospects. For the individual this means few opportunities and little possibility to participate in political,

social and economic life. It also means higher risks because of a lack of social security systems, violations of human dignity and human rights, and limited access to education, private property and resources such as water and land. Just as the causes of poverty are many and varied, so too are the measures undertaken by German development cooperation to reduce it. One example is the leading role played by Germany in advocating debt cancellation for the poorest nations on earth. On the initiative of the German government, the HIPC initiative to reduce the debt burden on highly indebted poor countries was extended in 1999 at the G8 summit meeting in Cologne, becoming the enhanced HIPC initiative or HIPC II. Protecting the natural environment With its development policy, the German government aims to help protect the environment and preserve the natural resource base on which all human life depends. It adopts a holistic and sustainable approach: the environment and natural resources are to be preserved for the generations to come, while at the same time giving today's generation the opportunity to benefit from progress. One example of how this strategy is realised is Germany's commitment to renewable energies and to boosting energy efficiency in developing countries. This is an important contribution to achieving sustainable use of energy at international level, to protecting the global climate and to moving towards energy supplies that are less dependent on oil. The German government is also working in depth with partner countries to preserve biodiversity, protect tropical forests and secure supplies of safe drinking water. Building peace and realising democracy German development policy is global structural and peace policy. It is part of a preventive strategy against violence, war and terrorism. The aim of German development policy is to use its resources for the purpose of averting violent conflicts and wars. Just over one fifth of German bilateral development cooperation is delivered in conflict environments, to help in building peace. This policy is based on an understanding of security that comprises political, economic, ecological and social stability. This is because, in the long term, there can only be peace if human rights are respected, if poverty is reduced, if economic and social injustices are removed, and if the natural environment is preserved as the vital foundation for all life on earth. To build peace it is important to foster democracy and the rule of law. These are also priority areas of German development cooperation, because along with good governance they are the prerequisite for successful development and thus also for peace. Since the Millennium Summit Germany has increased its funds to promote good governance threefold and its engagement in this area continues to grow. It is not just a matter of cooperating with development-oriented partner countries: even in situations of fragile statehood and poor governance, development policy engagement is meaningful and necessary to support transition processes. Promoting equitable forms of globalisation

The aim of German development policy is to help shape globalisation so that social, ecological and human needs are taken into account, ensuring that no region or population group is excluded or marginalised. This is not a goal that Germany can achieve on its own, which is why the Federal Republic supports the new global partnership between industrialised and developing countries. This mirrors Germany's understanding of development policy as a joint task for the international community. A global partnership of this kind can create the conditions needed if all people are to be able to make use of the opportunities offered by globalisation. Germany therefore advocates strengthening the influence of the developing countries within international organisations such as the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund. It is also endeavouring to ensure that working conditions around the globe are socially acceptable and fair. It is a staunch supporter of the Global Compact, a worldwide alliance of business and politics launched by the then UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 1999. Germanyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s understanding of global partnership also involves the inclusion of civil society and the private sector. For German development policy, operating within the global partnership means bringing together the specific competences, skills and experience of the different players. The Program of Action 2015 The Program of Action 2015 comprises ten priority areas for action designed to help realise the Millennium Declaration and the Millennium Development Goals derived from it: 1. Boosting the economy and enhancing the active participation of the poor 2. Realising the right to food and implementing agrarian reform 3. Creating fair trade opportunities for the developing countries 4. Reducing debt and financing development 5. Guaranteeing basic social services and strengthening social protection 6. Ensuring access to vital resources and fostering an intact environment 7. Realising human rights and respecting core labour standards 8. Fostering gender equality 9. Ensuring the participation of the poor in social, political and economic life and strengthening good governance 10. Resolving conflicts peacefully and fostering human security and disarmament For each area of action, the Program of Action 2015 lays out priority measures which the German government translates into practice in its bilateral relations, and its collaboration at European level and within international institutions. One important principle underlies all the interventions: the developing countries must be involved as full partners. In cooperation with a large number of national and international players, these areas for action are being constantly concretised, and joint actions are agreed and implemented. Regular reports are issued on progress here and on future activities. The BMZ coordinates the implementation process. The individual measures and the form they take reflect the fact that women and girls account for the majority of the poor. Activities are also aligned to the respective priorities of partner countries and to the prevailing circumstances in each case.

The Program of Action 2015 is intended to enhance public understanding in Germany for the challenge of combating poverty and for the importance of the Millennium Development Goals. A high-level dialogue forum supports the Program’s mainstreaming in society.

3. Canada 1st Session, 39th Parliament, 55-56 Elizabeth II, 2006-2007 HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA

BILL C-293 An Act respecting the provision of official development assistance abroad Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: SHORT TITLE Short title

1. This Act may be cited as the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act. PURPOSE

Purpose

2. (1) The purpose of this Act is to ensure that all Canadian official development assistance abroad is provided with a central focus on poverty reduction and in a manner that is consistent with Canadian values, Canadian foreign policy, sustainable development and democracy promotion and that promotes international human rights standards.

Official development assistance

(2) Canadian official development assistance abroad shall be defined exclusively with regard to these values. INTERPRETATION

Definitions “Canadian values” « valeurs canadiennes » “civil society organization” « organisme de la société civile »

3. The following definitions apply in this Act. “Canadian values” means, amongst others, values of global citizenship, equity and environmental sustainability. “civil society organization” means a notfor-profit or charitable organization whose governing structure is independent of government direction, and includes, but is not limited to, registered charities, non-governmental development organizations, community groups, women’s organizations, faithbased organizations, professional associations, trade unions, self-help groups, social movements, business associations, coalitions, human rights organizations and advocacy groups.

“competent minister” « ministre compétent » “democracy” « démocratie »

“international agency” « agence internationale » “international assistance” « aide internationale »

“international human rights standards” « normes internationales en matière de droits de la personne » “Minister” « ministre »

“official development assistance” « aide au développement officielle »

groups, women’s organizations, faithbased organizations, professional associations, trade unions, self-help groups, social movements, business associations, coalitions, human rights organizations and advocacy groups. “competent minister” means any minister designated by the Governor in Council to provide official development assistance in relation to this Act. “democracy” includes, but is not limited to, political and civil rights as defined by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. “international agency” means any organization whose objectives include global poverty reduction or international humanitarian assistance. “international assistance” means funding provided by government for international development, international financial institutions, global peace and security, crises overseas and international development research. “international human rights standards” means standards that are based on international human rights conventions and on international customary law.

“Minister” means the Minister of International Cooperation or any other minister designated by the Governor in Council as the Minister for the purposes of this Act. “official development assistance” means international assistance

(a) that is administered with the principal objective of promoting the economic development and welfare of developing countries, that is concessional in character, that conveys a grant element of at least 25%, and that meets the requirements set out in section 4; or (b) that is provided for the purpose of alleviating the effects of a natural or artificial disaster or other emergency occurring outside Canada. OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE

Official development assistance

4. (1) Official development assistance may be provided only if the competent minister is of the opinion that it (a) contributes to poverty reduction; (b) takes into account the perspectives of the poor; and (c) is consistent with international human rights standards.

Disaster or other emergency occurring outside Canada

(1.1) Notwithstanding subsection (1), official development assistance may be provided for the purposes of alleviating the effects of a natural or artificial disaster or other emergency occurring outside Canada.

Consultation

(2) In arriving at the opinion described in subsection (1), the competent minister shall consult with governments, international agencies and Canadian civil society organizations.

Calculation of contribution

(3) In calculating Canadaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s official development assistance contribution in Government of Canada publications, the competent minister or the Governor in Council shall consider only official development assistance as defined by this Act that meets the criteria in subsections (1) and (1.1).

No limit or restriction imposed

(4) Nothing in this Act shall be construed so as to limit the funding or restrict the activities of the International Development Research Centre. REPORTS

Report to Parliament

5. (1) The Minister or the competent minister shall cause to be submitted to each House of Parliament, within six months after the termination of each fiscal year or, if that House is not then sitting, on any of the first five days next thereafter that the House is sitting, a report containing (a) the total amount spent by the Government of Canada on official development assistance in the previous fiscal year; (b) a summary of any activity or initiative taken under this Act; (c) a summary of the annual report submitted under the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act; (d) a summary of any representation made by Canadian representatives with respect to priorities and policies of the Bretton Woods Institutions; and

(e) a summary of the Departmental Performance Report of the Canadian International Development Agency. Statistical report

(2) The Minister shall issue a statistical report on the disbursement of official development assistance within one year after the end of each fiscal year.

Report to Parliament

(3) The Minister of Finance shall, in addition to preparing the report required under section 13 of the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act, contribute the following to the report submitted to Parliament under subsection (1): (a) the position taken by Canada on any resolution that is adopted by the Board of Governors of the Bretton Woods Institutions; and (b) a summary of the manner in which Canada's activities under the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act have contributed to carrying out the purpose of this Act. COMING INTO FORCE

Coming into force

6. This Act comes into force 30 days after the day on which it receives royal assent.

Published under authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons Available Publishing and Depository Public Works and Government Services Canada

from: Services

ANNEX 4 POSITION DESCRIPTION : DIRECTOR GENERAL, COMMUNICATIONS BRANCH CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY GROUP & LEVEL: LOCATION:

EX-03 Ottawa

GENERAL ACCOUNTABILITY The Director General, Communications is accountable for: providing the Minister of International Cooperation, the Parliamentary Secretary and CIDA’s President with highquality strategic communications advice, messages, tools and opportunities; developing strategic messaging to increase Canadians’ understanding of the federal government’s international development initiatives and their value, efficiency and effectiveness, and developing CIDA’s internal communications approaches to foster performance excellence and a knowledge-sharing culture. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE The Director General, Communications reports to the President of CIDA. Other positions reporting to the President are: the Senior Vice President; the Vice Presidents of Africa, Americas, Asia, Europe, Middle East and Maghreb, Multilateral Programs, Canadian Partnership, Policy, Human Resources and Corporate Services, the CIO, Information Management and Technology, and the Director General, Performance and Knowledge Management. Reporting to the Director General are: the Director, Strategic Planning, Research and Analysis – accountable for leading the development and continuous improvement of the Branch’s integrated planning and management framework and services; leading the development of the Branch’s strategic priorities and business plans; directing public environment scanning strategies and the analysis of information for input to policies and programs; developing and maintaining the Branch’s management accountability and performance management frameworks; developing and maintaining the governance structure for CIDA’s Website, including content management solutions and web-based business tools, and acting on behalf of the Director General; leading communications product development, and the design and distribution of multi-media communications materials; managing the implementation of annual events and exhibit plan and associated logistics and materials; providing technical advice to clients across the Agency; leading the development of a photograph library in partnership with external organizations, and managing contracts for outsourced products and services; the Director, Corporate Communications – accountable for developing, implementing and continuously improving a coherent communications framework for CIDA to support the President; overseeing the provision of a full range of communications services and support; developing and maintaining a portfolio approach to assuring quality service to

clients across the organization; directing the provision of expert communications advice to the Minister; providing expert advice and leadership on internal communications, and representing CIDA on committees, councils and working groups; providing expert support to the Minister’s Office in the preparation of speeches, speaking notes and background material for the Minister’s use; developing and maintaining media relations management strategies and identifying opportunities to gain the widest exposure for CIDA’s aid programs and demonstrate their impact on developing countries, and supporting and coaching senior officials in their dealings with the media. the Director, Outreach and Public Relations - accountable for conceiving and implementing CIDA’s external messages and associated outreach programs; ensuring strategic and prudent management of the Development Information Program and its grants and contributions; providing expert advice to the Director General and other senior officials across; strengthening collaborative efforts and information-sharing networks across the Branch/Agency and representing the Branch and the Agency in various domestic and international forums; NATURE AND SCOPE The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) is charged with fulfilling Canada’s world-wide responsibilities to assist in the development of emerging countries. Linked to these responsibilities is the further obligation to increase the awareness of Canadians with respect to the challenges and opportunities presented by international development. The Agency is organized to promote and support bilateral and multilateral assistance projects, as well as provide technical and professional support to other government departments and to non-government organizations. Effective communications with the general and specialized publics regarding development assistance overseas is critical to the effectiveness of the organization and communications strategies must comprise information, education and consultation. The Director General is the senior official responsible for ensuring that the Agency adopts and implements a coherent and strategic approach to its communications with the public. This is especially challenging in an organizational setting that is structured both on a geographical and functional basis. The Director General is accountable for developing and sustaining a highly visible, proactive presence for the Agency across its domestic and international operating environment, including a $4 Million ODA-funded program, the Development Information Program. To maintain this presence, he/she is accountable for the development, dissemination, evaluation and ongoing enhancement of the corporate communications policy and planning framework. The Director General’s communications policy expertise is brought to bear in his/her providing direct support to the Agency's strategic plan. The comprehensive framework establishes the communications objectives, identifies opportunities and potential vulnerabilities in the public environment and sets the communications priorities for the coming years. In developing communications plans and priorities, the Director General consults and works collegially with other executives across the Agency to ensure that communications priorities are aligned with CIDA’s strategic objectives.

The Director General's expert advice and briefings to the Minister and President play an essential role in CIDA’s ability to strongly position itself among partners and stakeholders at the national level and to gain the support of Canadians as a whole. He/she provides expert advice to the President on the best approaches for the Agency’s management of its communications function and the interpretation of the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada. The Director General plays an important role in advising on the most strategic representational opportunities for the Minister and the President, who rely on the incumbent's sound judgement and political acumen in advising on the relative merits of different venues and approaches. The incumbent is expected to provide sound communications advice that will significantly influence the way in which the corporate executives approach the target audience and generate successful outcomes. This is of particular importance in managing the sensitivities of inter-governmental and interorganizational relations. In the context of media relations and various public events, the Director General provides special communications support to the President and other senior officials, often under tight timelines. He/she provides expert insight on key themes, messages and sensitivities which, from a professional communicator’s perspective, might undermine the effectiveness of CIDA’s agenda. As well, the incumbent assists the President and Minister in preparations for speaking engagements and appearances before Parliamentary committees. The Director General is strategically placed to assess the public environments and to identify changing political climates. He/she oversees the development of frameworks to support public opinion research projects and to systematically track events and analyze public environment information on evolving issues. Based on such analytical evidence, the Director General makes recommendations to the President to support key policy and program decisions. The Director General oversees the development and execution of the Agency’s media relations plans and strategies. He/she is required to provide strategic advice and carefully crafted communications strategies for complex events and issues. The management of these issues is very important because they significantly influence the success of programs and also affect Canada’s standing in the international community. The Director General is accountable for the design, development and provision of a range of practical, high quality multi-media communications services, products and materials. These include publications, brochures, articles, events planning, and services. Using a mix of in-house and out-sourced expertise, the incumbent assures the use of leading edge communications practices and technologies across the full spectrum of communications requirements. The Director General is accountable for operational policies, standards and guidelines specific to CIDA’s particular communications needs.

Further, he/she ensures functional support in regional settings, including communications with Members of Parliament constituency offices, to assure consistent messaging, while at the same time creating the flexibility needed by a wide variety of programs. The Director General is accountable for all internal communications and ensures that the approaches are fully aligned with CIDA’s external messaging. He/she oversees a portfolio approach to service delivery on geographical and functional bases and sets high standards of performance for the portfolio officers. The Director General oversees the management of issues that are highly politicized, or have the potential to become so. These issues must be carefully managed by someone with ready access to the most senior decision-makers and require responses that are politically compatible with overall governmental objectives. The incumbent must have the capacity to anticipate problems, and in consultation with the President and the involved officials, deals with them proactively to influence resolution. This capacity is based on a combination of communications expertise, a thorough knowledge and appreciation of the respective positions of involved stakeholders, and a full understanding of the CIDA’s strategic objectives in the context of the federal agenda. The Director General is responsible for coordinating the activities of the International Development Week held each year and provides the Minister, Secretaries of State and the President with the required communications and logistic support. He/she also directs the development of communications strategies in support of a number of key national and international, overseas events, such as the Population Conference and the Social Summit. As a member of CIDA’s Executive Committee, the Director General provides influential advice on the Agency’s strategic direction over the medium to long term. He/she represents the Agency at international meetings in Canada and abroad, and in domestic circles, speaks on behalf of the Agency in dealings with officials at Foreign Affairs, the Communications Secretariat at PCO, other departments, representatives of industry associations, universities and the diplomatic community. In this capacity, the Director General exercises considerable freedom to act on behalf of the President. DIMENSIONS Staff (Full-Time Equivalents):

Salaries:

$6.5 M

Operations:

$5.4M

SPECIFIC ACCOUNTABILITIES 1. Leads and oversees the development, dissemination, evaluation and continuous improvement of CIDA’s communications policy, planning and program framework, establishes the Agency's communications objectives, opportunities and potential vulnerabilities in the public environment and sets priorities for the coming years. 2. Plays an essential advisory role on communications policy and issues in support of the Minister, President and senior officials across the Agency, provides strategic briefings and documentation, often under severe time constraints, and prepares the Minister and President for appearances before Parliamentary committees and press conferences. 54

3. Oversees the development of frameworks to support public opinion research projects and to systematically track events and analyze public environment information on international aid, and based on research findings, makes expert recommendations to the President to support key policy and program decisions. 4. Takes the departmental lead on incident management and resolution, and oversees the development, implementation and continuous improvement of incident management frameworks, including protocols and guides on information gathering, reporting mechanisms and standard approaches. 5. Directs high performance creative services and the design, development and provision of multi-media communications products and materials, including publications, brochures, articles, the Agencyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Web-site, events planning and the management of a mix of in-house and out-sourced expertise and services. 6. Directs a client portfolio approach to the provision of communications advice, expertise and services across the Agency and in the regional context. 7. Represents CIDAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interests and positions at senior levels across the federal system, NGOs and public/private sector players, manages media relations and protects CIDAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interests in joint communications activities. 8. Establishes priorities, plans and manages the resources of the Directorate in a costeffective manner, and participates as a member of the Departmental Executive Committee. SEE OTHER POSITIONS IN ATTACHMENTS