The Government’s communication: Diffusion Innovation or Participatory Approach towards Renewable Energy Development Project

Gregoria Arum Yudarwati

Abstract


This study focuses on development communication in supporting Government’s renewable energy project in Indonesia. Using a case study of the communication in the implementation of a micro-hydro power plant (MHPP) project by Indonesia government, this study examines whether the government’s communication aims to encourage community participation in the project or merely diffuse the innovation for community’s adoption, or combine both approaches. This project was chosen, since this requires more community participation to maintain it as well as sustained communication to facilitate meaningful engagement. Appreciative inquiry involving six focus group discussions and nine in-depth interviews were conducted to explore communities’ experiences in exploiting the MHPP and accompanying communication process. The findings show that project development is divided into five stages: pre-initiation, initiation, adoption, transition and sustainability. Compared to the diffusion and adoption process, this project cycle is comparable to the five stages of the diffusion and adoption process. The information sharing session to introduce the innovation is significant to build awareness among communities. Likewise, the ideas to choose and train communities’ representatives as pioneers to the adoption process help communities gain direct experiences about the use of technology. Nevertheless, the domination of diffusion innovation approach with mechanistic communication that prioritises technological change may lead to a lack of participation and empowerment. Participatory approach that acknowledges local values will likely empower communities and build ownership towards the project.

ABSTRAK

Kajian ini fokus pada komunikasi pembangunan dalam mendukung proyek energi terbarukan Pemerintah di Indonesia. Dengan menggunakan studi kasus komunikasi dalam pelaksanaan proyek pembangkit listrik tenaga mikrohidro (PLTMH) yang dilakukan pemerintah Indonesia, penelitian ini mengkaji apakah komunikasi pemerintah bertujuan untuk mendorong partisipasi masyarakat dalam proyek tersebut atau sekadar menyebarkan inovasi agar dapat diadopsi oleh masyarakat, atau menggabungkan kedua pendekatan tersebut. Proyek ini dipilih karena memerlukan lebih banyak partisipasi masyarakat untuk memeliharanya serta komunikasi yang berkelanjutan untuk memfasilitasi keterlibatan yang bermakna. Metode appreciative inquiry yang melibatkan enam focus group discussions dan sembilan wawancara mendalam dilakukan untuk menggali pengalaman masyarakat dalam memanfaatkan PLTMH dan proses komunikasi yang menyertainya. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pengembangan proyek dibagi menjadi lima tahap: pra-inisiasi, inisiasi, adopsi, transisi, dan keberlanjutan. Siklus proyek ini sebanding dengan lima tahap proses difusi dan adopsi. Sesi berbagi informasi untuk memperkenalkan inovasi ini penting untuk membangun kesadaran di kalangan masyarakat. Demikian pula, gagasan untuk memilih dan melatih perwakilan masyarakat sebagai pionir dalam proses adopsi membantu masyarakat mendapatkan pengalaman langsung tentang penggunaan teknologi. Meskipun demikian, dominasi pendekatan difusi inovasi dengan komunikasi mekanistik yang mengedepankan perubahan teknologi dapat menyebabkan kurangnya partisipasi dan pemberdayaan. Pendekatan partisipatif yang melibatkan nilai-nilai lokal akan dapat lebih memberdayakan masyarakat dan membangun kepemilikan terhadap proyek.

 


Save to Mendeley


Keywords


development communication; diffusion innovation; participatory; empowerment

Full Text:

PDF

References


Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216 — 224

Aycrigg, M. (1998). Participation and the World Bank: Success, Constraints, and Responses. Social Development Paper (Vol. 29). Washington, DC: World Bank.

Balit, S., & Acunzo, M. (2020). A Changing World: FAO Efforts in Communication for Rural Development. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change (pp. 133-156). Singapore: Springer Singapore.

Barua, D. & Asif, M. (2011). The Bangladesh micro-generation energy model: Lessons for developing countries. A Scientific Journal of COMSATS – SCIENCE VISION, 15(2), 49-55.

Carlisle, N., Elling, J., & Penney, T. (2008). A Renewable Energy Community: Key Elements, A reinvented community to meet untapped customer needs for shelter and transportation with minimal environmental impacts, stable energy costs, and a sense of belonging Technical Report. Colorado: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

Carpentier, N. (2016). Beyond the Ladder of Participation: An Analytical Toolkit for the Critical Analysis of Participatory Media Processes. The Public, 23(1), 70-88.

Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D. K., & Stavros, J. M. (2008). Appreciative inquiry handbook : for leaders of change (2nd ed.)., San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publisher.

Cornwall, A., & Jewkes, R. (1995). What is participatory research? Social Science & Medicine, 41(12), 1667-1676.

Duraiappah, A. K., Roddy, P., & Parry, J.-E. (2005). Have Participatory Approaches Increased Capabilities? Manitoba: International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).

Dutta, M. J., Jayan, P., & Elers, C. (2021). Culture-centered approach to communication for social change. In S. R. Melkote & A. Singhal (Eds.), Handbook of Communication and Development (pp. 120-141). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

HickeY, M., & Mohan, G. (2004). Towards participation as transformation: critical themes adn challenges. In M. HickeY & G. Mohan (Eds.), Participation - From Tyranny to Transformation Exploring New Approached to Participation in Development. London: Zed Book.

Hinthorne, L. L., & Schneider, K. (2012). Playing with Purpose: Using Serious Play to Enhance Participatory Development Communication in Research. International Journal of Communication, 6, 2801–2824

Kulundu, I. (2014). In pursuit of participation: tracking the influence of local action for sustainable development. In H. Lotz-Sisitka, G. Cundill, A. Wals, R. Rodela, M. Ali, M. Mukute, & I. Kulundu (Eds.), (Re) views on social learning literature: a monograph for social learning researchers in natural resources management and environmental education (pp. 39-58). Environmental Learning Research Center Rhodes University.

Laininen, E. (2019). Transforming our worldview towards a sustainable future. In J. W. Cook (Ed.), Sustainability, Human Well-Being, and the Future of Education (pp. 161-200). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lie, R., & Servaes, J. (2015). Disciplines in the field of communication for development and social change. Communication Theory, 25(2), 244-258.

Martínez, X.Ú., Jim´enez-Morales, M., Mas´o, P. S., & Bernet, J. T. (2017). Exploring the conceptualization and research of empowerment in the field of youth. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 22(4), 405–418.

McPhail, T. L. (2009). Introduction to development communication. In T. L. McPhail (Ed.), Development Communication: Reframing the Role of the Media (pp. 1-20). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Mefalopulos, P. (2005). Communication for sustainable development: Applications and challenges. In O. Hemer & T. Tufte (Eds.), Media and global change: Rethinking communication for development (pp. 247-260). Buenos Aires: CLACSO.

Mefalopulos, P. (2008). Development Communication Sourcebook, Broadening the Boundaries of Communication. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Morris, N. (2006). A Comparative analysis of the diffusion and participatory models in development communication. Communication Theory, 13(2), 225-248.

Murni, S., Whale, J., Urmee, T., Davis, J., & Harries, D. (2012). The role of micro hydro power systems in remote rural electrification: A case study in the Bawan Valley, Borneo. Procedia Engineering, 49, 189-196.

Parahita, G. D. (2018). Shifts and Challenges of Communication for Sustainable Development in Indonesia. In K. Prasad (Ed.), Communication, Culture and Ecology, Rethinking Sustainable Development in Asia (pp. 155-172). Singapore: Springer.

Pretty, J. N., Gujit, I., Thompson, J., & Scoones, I. (1995). Participatory Learning and Action: A Trainer’s Guide. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Servaes, J. (2008). Communication for development and social change. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications,.

Servaes, J. (2020). Terms and Definitions in Communication for Development and Social Change. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change (pp. 3-13). Singapore: Springer.

Servaes, J., & Lie, R. (2020). Key Concepts, Disciplines, and Fields in Communication for Development and Social Change. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change (pp. 29-59). Singapore: Springer.

Servaes, J., & Malikhao, P. (2002). Chapter 7. Development communication approaches in an international perspective. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Approaches to Development Communication. Paris: UNESCO.

Servaes, J., & Malikhao, P. (2008). Development communication approaches in an international perspective. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Communication for Development and Social Change (pp. 158-179). New Delhi: SAGE.

Servaes, J., & Malikhao, P. (2020). Communication for Development and Social Change: Three Development Paradigms, Two Communication Models, and Many Applications and Approaches. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change (pp. 63-92). Singapore: Springer.

Srampickal, J. (2006). Development and Participatory Communication. Communication Research Trends, 25(2).

The World Bank. (2003). Strategic for Development Project. Washington DC: The World Bank.

Tufte, T., & Mefalopulos, P. (2009). Participatory communication: A practical guide. World Bank Working Paper No. 170. Washington, D.C: World Bank

UNICEF. (2005). Strategic Communication for Behaviour and Social Change in South Asia. Kathmandu: UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia (ROSA).

United Nations Development Programme, IRGT: A Global Network of Transgender Women and HIV, United Nations Population Fund, UCSF Center of Excellence for Transgender Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, World Health Organization, . . . United States Agency for International Development. (2016). Implementing comprehensive HIV and STI programmes with transgender people: Practical guidance for collaborative interventions. New York: United Nation Development Program.

Urmee, T., & Anisuzzaman. (2016). Social, cultural and political dimensions of off-grid renewable energy programs in developing countries. Renewable Energy, 159(1).

Waisbord, S. (2020). Family Tree of Theories, Methodologies, and Strategies in Development Communication. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change (pp. 1-40). Singapore: Springer.

Wing, M. G., Edwardsen, K., McNair, M. B., Miles, E., Wilson, K., & Sessions, J. (2007). Developing a sustainable water-delivery system in rural El Salvador. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 3(1), 72-78.

Yudarwati, G.A. (2019). Appreciative Inquiry for Community Engagement in Indonesia Rural Communities. Public Relations Review, Vol. 45 (4).

Yudarwati, G. A., & Gregory, A. (2022). Improving government communication and empowering rural communities: Combining public relations and development communication approaches. Public Relations Review, 48(3).




DOI: https://doi.org/10.33508/jk.v12i2.4993