Editing Development communication (section)

=== Stakeholder analysis ===
{{Main|Stakeholder analysis}}

The design and implementation of policies is becoming more complex, and the number and type of actors involved in policy implementation more diverse;<ref name=EVAL /> hence, the policy process is evolving towards multi-actor and multi-goal situations.<ref name=CL>{{cite journal|last=Carlsson|first=L|title=Non-hierarchical Evaluation of Policy|journal=Evaluation|year=2000|volume=6|issue=2|pages=201–216|doi=10.1177/13563890022209217|s2cid=154121642}}</ref> "[[Project stakeholder|Stakeholder]]" has been variously defined according to the goal of the analysis, the analytic approach or the policy area. Where several groups of stakeholders are involved in the policy process, a stakeholder analysis can provide a useful resource.

Stakeholder analysis can help analyze the behavior, intentions, interrelations, agendas, interests and the resources of stakeholders in the policy processes.<ref name=EVAL /> Crosby described stakeholder analysis as offering methods and approaches to analyze the interests and roles of key players. Hannan and Freeman include groups or individual who can affect or be affected by the achievement of the organization's objectives, while others exclude those who cannot influence the outcome. For instance, Brugha and Varvasovszky defined stakeholder as "individuals, groups, and organizations who have an interest (stake) and the potential to influence the actions and aims of an organization, project, or policy direction."<ref name=EVAL>{{Cite journal | last1 = Mehrizi | first1 = M. H. R. | last2 = Ghasemzadeh | first2 = F. | last3 = Molas-Gallart | first3 = J. | doi = 10.1177/1356389009341731 | title = Stakeholder Mapping as an Assessment Framework for Policy Implementation | journal = Evaluation | volume = 15 | issue = 4 | pages = 427–444 | year = 2009 | hdl = 10261/104090 | s2cid = 145353042 | hdl-access = free }}</ref> According to Flor,<ref name=AGF>{{cite journal|last=Flor|first=Alexander, G.|title=Development Communication and the Policy Sciences|journal=Journal of Development Communication|date=December 1991}}</ref> a stakeholder analysis of communication policy would reveal the interplay of the following sectors:
Government – Enacts all communication policies, making it the most powerful stakeholder.
Education sector – Conducts research that underlies subsequent policies.
Communication industry – Influences communication policies. May adopt self-regulation to avoid/delay government regulation. For example, the [[Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster sa Pilipinas]] and the Philippine Press Institute institute [[ethics codes]].
Private sector – Avoid policies that limit content and to protect themselves from opponents.
Religious sector – Traditionally opposes policies that allow obscenity, violence and profanity to be distributed.
Foreign interests – e.g., international lending agencies may demand the end of monopolies—including state media entities—as a condition for financial aid.
Consumers – Traditionally not consulted, but more recently claiming to protect the public interest.

The United Nations has recognised the importance of "the need to support two-way communication systems that enable dialogue and that allow communities to express their aspirations and concerns and participate in decisions...."<ref>{{cite web|last=UNESCO|title=UN Agencies and Communication for Development|url=http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=21370&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html|publisher=UNESCO|access-date=1 October 2012}}</ref> Such two-way interactions can help expose local reality.<ref>
{{cite thesis
 | url        = http://vuir.vu.edu.au/15344/
 | title      = Participatory and non-participatory modes of nutrition communication in a developing country: A case study of Nepal
 | author     = Khadka, N.
 | location   = Victoria, Australia
 | year       = 1997
 | publisher  = Unpublished PhD thesis
 | work       = Victoria University Institutional Repository
 | access-date = 4 October 2012
| type = phd
 }}</ref>
Keune and Sinha claim that community involvement in development communication policy is important, as they are the "ultimate and perhaps the most important beneficiaries of development communication policies and planning".<ref>
{{cite book
 | title      = Development Communication Policies and Planning as cited by Habermann, P. and De Fontgalland, G. (1978) Development Communication: Rhetoric and Reality. AMIC, Singapore.
 | pages       = 30–40
 | author     = Keune, R.
 | author2    = Sinha, P.R.R.
 | location   = Singapore
 | year       = 1978
 | publisher  = AMIC
}}</ref>