The World Bank - Working for a world free of poverty

Views menu

Exploring the interactions among public opinion, governance, and the public sphere

About us

April 2009

Also Delighted

A reader's comment to the blog post What a Difference an 'S' makes:

I echo John Gastil's delight with this article.  As someone who is passionate about the impact that communication and strategic communications can have on advancing development and someone who spends a lot of time "educating" and "persuading" development experts to include communication(s) in their program planning, I found this very useful, indeed.  I loudly echo your last paragraph and the last line in your next-to-last paragraph.  Paolo, thank you for this thought piece.  I hope others will comment.

Wende DuFlon

(Development) Communication: The Lubricant for Running the Development Engine Smoothly

The third of the ten key issues about development communication is a crucial one and it asserts that there is a significant difference between development communication and other types of communication. What is the difference and why is important? Let us start by defining communication’s most renowned function; i.e. informing audiences and/or trying to persuade them to change attitudes or behavior. Communication is almost exclusively identified this way. However, the interdisciplinary area of development communication is not exclusively and not even primarily about information or persuasion.

Four Days with Asian Reform Managers

Close to 30 government officials from seven Asian countries* recently participated in CommGAP’s workshop on communication and governance reform.  Entitled People, Politics, and Change, the workshop was held in Manila, Philippines from April 20 to 23.  The participant pool included a few high level officials, both cabinet ministers and national parliamentarians.  Also in the group were governance specialists from the Asian Development Bank (ADB), Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID), and the World Bank’s newly established regional governance hub in Bangkok.  Observers included representatives from the Asian Institute of Management and the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication

"Out of the crooked timber..."

There is a global debate going on concerning why the global financial crisis erupted. The technical debate is what it is; so far there is far more heat than light. But in addition to the technical debate is a debate about how certain underlying assumptions about human nature entertained by economists and even famous central bankers have turned out to be incorrect. It turns out that human beings - as consumers, investors, bankers, stock traders - have not behaved in precisely the ways "rigorous" economic theories predicted that they would. Even Alan Greenspan, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, showed his surprise at human nature at a congressional hearing late last year: "I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms."

It's Not Just the Money! Communication as Core Element of Governance Projects

Public trust, legitimacy of governments, and good governance may be more valuable than pushing more and more money into poor countries - money that may not even reach those who need it. This observation comes from World Bank President Robert Zoellick. He spoke at the Open Forum of the Governance and Anti-Corruption (GAC) Council this week, and paid tribute to issues that go way beyond classical development economics, such as governance and accountability. Success in these areas need to mean as much to us as the traditional loan agenda, Zoellick asserted.

Quote of the Week

"Public opinion seems to achieve integration: the individuals trying to avoid isolation are ready to compromise, thereby furnishing society with some common ground which, as is generally acknowledged, is a condition for the society's survival. Public opinion seems to stabilize societies. Partly this is a consequence of integration but it is more. Political scientists interested in developing societies complain that the lack of public opinion, or of an infrastructure of consensus among persons interested in the political sphere, leads to extreme and frequent upheavals. Public opinion establishes priorities. In the field of communication research, this is called the agenda-setting function. It dictates what problems society deems to be its most urgent tasks. Public opinion confers legitimation. It is striving for consensus (exerting strong conformity pressure on the individuals), defending established norms, or creating those which in turn will be legally sanctioned. This is the meaning of 'all governments rest on opinion.'"

Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann

The Collective Action Problem: The Case of America's Uninsured

Numbers alone do not confer strength, and if that can happen in an advanced democracy just imagine how tough it is to make numbers count in a poor, developing country. The case in point is the plight of the 50 million Americans without health insurance.  According to a recent report [No strength in numbers of America's uninsured],  it remains very difficult for these 50 million citizens to turn their frustration into political action. Here is why:

Posting on "Political Will"

A reader's comment to the blog post Whose Will Constitutes 'Political Will'?

"Political will" is surely one of the more elusive terms in the international development community.  Sina captures much of its ambiguity well in his posting.  In addition to what it is, we might also ask where political will comes from.  In some cases it originates with an individual, generally situated somewhere within the state apparatus (best if at a high level) who becomes the "champion" that Sina refers to.   But political will can also stem from civil society advocacy that puts enough pressure on the state to develop the political will needed to bring about action.  The civil rights movement in the USA had champions over many decades, and they made some progress (e.g., Eleanor Roosevelt and the Marian Anderson singing controversy of 1939, recently commemorated on its 70th anniversary at Lincoln Memorial this past Easter in Washington).  So there was some political will in high places that helped.  President Truman's desegregation of the US military in 1948 offers another example.  But it took another 20 years and a huge, sustained civil society effort to accumulate the pressure needed to strengthen political will sufficiently to pass the landmark civil rights legislation of the mid-1960s. So it was a combination of political will on the inside and civil society on the outside that moved civil rights along over the years, with each reinforcing the other.  More recent examples abound (e.g., environment, women's movement). Analyzing the synergy involved and crafting ways to support it should be a critical focus of CommGAP.

Harry Blair

Corruption: How to beat it

A reader's response to the blog post, Breaking the Spiral of Silence About Corruption:

Change the Frame. Change the cultural narrative, not enough to hurt or interfere with indigenous cultures, but take a revered icon, hero, mythical narrative, reconstructing it to show that great men do not take bribes nor do they give them. Think about Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, Westside Story, and Love Story, and you can see how a subtle retelling of a well known and revered cultural narrative is transformational. We need to start thinking about transformational leadership, which uses familiar schemas to bring about change.

Karen Johnson-Cartee

Breaking the Spiral of Silence About Corruption

There's nothing worse that can happen to a young scholar at her first conference presentation than having one of the big founders of one's academic field sit in the first row and stare intently at her poor little PowerPoint presentation. This happened to me with Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann, one of the most eminent figures in the field of contemporary communication studies. She's eminent for a good reason, and also very relevant to our field of communication and governance.