Module 2

Theoretical framework of Development communication

Dominant and alternative paradigms of Development

What are the three paradigms of development?

historically (Rogers, 2008) are as following:

● I) The Dominant Paradigm (modernisation)

● I) The Opposing Paradigm (dependency)
● III) The Emerging Paradigm (participation)

What is diffusion of innovation theory?

The diffusion of innovations theory describes the pattern and speed at which new ideas,
practices, or products spread through a population. The main players in the theory are
innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards.

The diffusion of innovations theory is a hypothesis outlining how new technological and other
advancements spread throughout societies and cultures, from introduction to widespread
adoption. The diffusion of innovations theory seeks to explain how and why new ideas and
practices are adopted, with timelines potentially spread out over long periods.1

The way in which innovations are communicated to different parts of society and the subjective
opinions associated with the innovations are important factors in how quickly diffusion—or
spreading—occurs. Important to understand when developing market share, this theory is
frequently referred to in the marketing of new products.

● The diffusion of innovations theory describes the pattern and speed at which new ideas,
practices, or products spread through a population.
● The main players in the theory are innovators, early adopters, early majority, late
majority, and laggards.
● In marketing, this diffusion of innovations theory is often applied to help understand and
promote the adoption of new products.
● This application of the theory usually focuses on identifying and recruiting influential
early adopters to help accelerate consumer acceptance.
Understanding the Diffusion of Innovations Theory
The theory was developed by E.M. Rogers, a communication theorist at the University of New
Mexico, in 1962. Integrating previous sociological theories of behavioral change, it explains the
passage of an idea through stages of adoption by different actors. The main people in the
diffusion of innovations theory are:

● Innovators: People who are open to risks and the first to try new ideas.
● Early adopters: People who are interested in trying new technologies and establishing
their utility in society.
● Early majority: Those who pave the way for use of an innovation within mainstream
society and are part of the general population.
● Late majority: Another part of the general population—the set of people who follow the
early majority into adopting the innovation as part of their daily life.
● Laggards: People who lag the general population in adopting innovative products and
new ideas. This is primarily because they are risk-averse and set in their ways of doing
things. Eventually, the sweep of an innovation through mainstream society makes it
impossible for them to conduct their daily life (and work) without it. As a result, they are
forced to begin using it.

Factors that affect the rate of innovation diffusion include the mix of rural to urban within a
society's population, the society's level of education, and the extent of industrialization and
development. Different societies are likely to have different adoption rates—the rate at which
members of a society accept a new innovation.

Adoption rates for different types of innovation vary. For example, a society may have adopted
the internet faster than it adopted the automobile due to cost, accessibility, and familiarity with
technological change.

Examples of the Diffusion of Innovations Theory

While the diffusion of innovations theory was developed during the mid-1900s, most new
technologies in human progress, whether it is the printing press during the 16th century or the
internet in the 20th century, have followed a similar path to widespread adoption.
The diffusion of innovations theory is extensively used by marketers to promote the adoption of
their products. In such cases, marketers generally find an early set of people passionate about the
product. These early adopters are responsible for evangelizing its utility to mainstream audiences.

A recent example of this method is Facebook. It started off as a product targeted at students and
professionals in educational institutions. As students' use increased beyond school, the social
media site spread to mainstream society and across borders.

The diffusion of innovations theory is also used to design public health programs. Again, a set of
people are chosen as early adopters of a new technology or practice and spread awareness about it
to others. However, cultural limitations often impede such programs from being successful.

1. Concepts of Participatory Development and Good Governance

In this section, we summarize the concepts needed to consider the basic directions of Japan's aid for
participatory development and good governance addressed in the next section. Because the purpose of
aid is to promote the economic and social development of developing countries, we have decided to
investigate the components and definitions of participatory development and good governance in
relation to the promotion of economic and social development.

1.1 Participatory Development

The goal of economic and social development in developing countries is to set in motion a process of
self-reliant and sustainable development through which social justice will be realized. "Self-reliant
development" means building the endogenous mechanisms of society that will enable developing
nations ultimately to achieve growth without aid. "Sustainable" development means continuing a
stable growth pattern in such a way as economic development is in harmony with the environment.
The realization of "social justice" means equalizing and ensuring opportunities for people to
participate in order to rectify disparities between regions, income levels, and gender.

Toward this end, the focus in development should be not only on increasing the material production
but also on fostering and improving the social capabilities of people involved in development. For this
to be done, people involved in development should take an active part in the process of planning and
implementing development activities as well as enjoy their benefits. This is what "participation"
means. Participation in every aspect of politics, economy, and society is important as both the goal
and means of development.

This study committee would like to regard participatory development as a form of development that
heightens sustainability and self-reliance and aims for the realization of social justice by improving
the quality of people's participation. The areas in which participatory development takes place exist
on a diversity of levels, ranging from the most microcosmic level of individual organizations' aid
projects, to the communities and local societies that surround them, up to and including the national
level. It is at the levels of rural communities, local societies, and the state that all of the aspects of
participation in the economy, society, and politics overlap. We would like to highlight local societies
and groups of rural communities that can serve as administrative and developmental units, and direct
our focus regarding participatory development on increasing the quality of participation in these local
societies.

The quality of this participation will be enhanced as basic human needs of regional inhabitants are
met, as people's awareness and the organization of people's groups in local societies are promoted,
and as organizations' capability to manage resources, to govern themselves autonomously, and to
negotiate with representatives from outside the community are progressively fostered. The series of
processes through which peoples' awareness, organization, and capabilities are continuously
developed is collectively termed "the process of participation in local society," but many forms of
participation in this process actually exist. The following three elements are involved; they interact
while influencing the form as well as the quality of participation.

● 1. People and local organizations (including the subgroups that form part of the organization
when an organization is involved), the agents of participation;
● 2. The formal and informal institutions such as laws, administrative systems, or behavioral
norms that determine the participating entity's opportunities for participation and behavioral
models;
● 3. The national structures of state and government that are guarantors of the effectiveness of
these institutions and can improve or strengthen them through policy support.

The quality of participation varies depending on the following: (i) what kind of participating entities
exist, and what kind of institutions offer what kind of opportunities for participation, (ii) the extent to
which the state and government channels guarantee the effectiveness of existing institutions and carry
out appropriate policy support, (iii) the degree to which participating entities are able to respond
appropriately to opportunities to participate, and finally (iv) how the state, government structures, and
other third parties are able to improve and strengthen institutions or to find a mutually complementary
and strengthening relationship with informal and formal institutions when necessary in order to
increase opportunities to participate. Because these three elements are themselves determined by the
initial cultural and historical conditions and status of development of the society in which
participation takes place, the quality of participation is also influenced by these conditions and their
developmental status.
Through participatory development, we seek not only to construct or restructure such formal
institutions as legal and administrative systems, administrative processes, and markets, but also to
introduce mechanisms from informal institutions such as the existing traditional resource management
systems of local societies to enhance the effectiveness of existing formal institutions. For example, it
is conceivable that by actively mobilizing the know-how of local societies and such informal customs
as mutual aid, one can compensate for the limitations of existing formal systems and by enhancing the
capabilities of community members and their organizations, one can create norms for new and better
organizational arrangements, improving and developing informal institutions. Furthermore, efforts to
promote a change in the perceptions and enhance the capabilities of public officials and to improve or
streamline the government agencies and channels will facilitate the above-mentioned improvements
and the degree of effective and sustainable participation in local societies.