Editing Development communication (section)

===== Policy Delphi =====
The Policy Delphi, according to Flor (1991), is a variation of the Delphi technique. It is a tool for the analysis of policy issues seeking the involvement and participation of anonymous respondents (usually representatives of the different stakeholders of the policy). Herein, the desirability and feasibility of certain policies are assessed from the points of view of the different stakeholders.<ref name=":2" /> Meanwhile, according to Turoff (1975), the policy Delphi aims to create the best possible contrasting insights to resolve a major policy problem. Herein, the decision maker is interested on having a group that will give him options and supporting evidences where he can choose from for him to make a solution, rather than having a group that will produce the decision for him. ''"The Policy Delphi is, then, a tool for the analysis of policy issues and not a mechanism for making a decision"'' (Turoff, 1975).<ref name=":10">Turoff, Murray (1975). The Policy Delphi. In ''Harold A. Linstone and Murray Turoff (Eds.), The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications.'' pp. 80–96. Online copy was accessed from http://is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook/delphibook.pdf [24 April 2016]</ref> Turoff (1975) notes the challenging nature of policy Delphi as a means for policy analysis, "both for the design team and for the respondents" (Turoff, 1975). As a process, the policy Delphi undergoes the following six phases: (1) Formulating the issue; (2) Citing options; (3) Deciding preliminary stance about the issue; (4) Searching and getting reasons for disputes; (5) Assessing the underlying reasons; (6) Reassessing the options.<ref name=":10" />

As a methodology, Delphi is used for structuring a group communication process so that the process is effective in allowing a group of individuals, as a whole, to deal with a complex problem.<ref name=":10" /> As mentioned, one of the advantages of this technique is the involvement of stakeholders in the analysis which is imperatively instrumental in building a consensus among people who will be/are affected by the policy/project. In the Philippines, this has also been well applied in a study conducted by Dr. Alexander Flor and Dr. Felix Librero in the Southeast Asian Needs Assessment for a Global Open Agriculture and Food University.<ref name=":15" /> Recently, Haynes, Palermo and Reidlinger(2016) adopted a Delphi modified technique(James Lind Alliance Approach) in their study in exploring obesity prevention<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Haynes|first1=Emily|last2=Palermo|first2=Claire|last3=Reidlinger|first3=Dianne P.|date=2016-09-01|title=Modified Policy-Delphi study for exploring obesity prevention priorities|journal=BMJ Open|language=en|volume=6|issue=9|pages=e011788|doi=10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011788|issn=2044-6055|pmid=27601495|pmc=5020738}}</ref> in Australia.

Flor (1991)<ref name=":2"/> emphasizes the incorporation of divergent stakeholders in communication policy making. That the State is not a lone actor in the creation of public policies as noted by the various stakeholders identified by Flor (1991), attesting to the fact that State actions do not occur in an empty space. Consumer involvement to policy making can therefore of paramount importance in helping create relevant policies vis-à-vis Gatung's (1979)<ref>Galtung, Johian. (1971). 'A structural theory of imperialism'. ''Journal of Peace Research'', 8 (2) pp.81–117.</ref> postulation of policies promoting "''horizontalization'' where exchanges occur between the centers and peripheries "on more equal terms"." In this regard, employing appropriate methods in policy research such would be necessary in 'light of the diversity of stakeholders involved, there is a possibility to broaden the scope of 'expertise' to share opinion across diverse perspectives including local communities' (Haynes, et al., 2016). Employing the Modified Policy-Delphi technique to crafting an all-inclusive communication policy include the following jusutification:
* The Policy-Delphi technique ability to explore consensus and dissent, rather than aiming to achieve consensus,
* As a flexible technique, it can be applied to various situations to map overlapping priorities from different perspectives and identify mutual priorities across stakeholder groups and therefore is a valuable exercise for investigating complex public issues
* The technique facilitates an in-depth investigation which may detect limitations, considerations and consequences of policy options which may enhance the value and success of policy implementation.
* The diversity of stakeholders involved makes reaching consensus on priorities less feasible but where mapping perspectives may identify mutual concepts behind the most agreeable options to inform future research and practice.
* The technique provides an opportunity for participants to contribute equally, and offers additional options and comments throughout; in this respect, it gives all participants, including consumers, a voice in the complex debate [equity in 'Voices']
The methodology outlined in Haynes et al. (2016)<ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011788|title = Modified Policy-Delphi study for exploring obesity prevention priorities|year = 2016|last1 = Haynes|first1 = Emily|last2 = Palermo|first2 = Claire|last3 = Reidlinger|first3 = Dianne P.|journal = BMJ Open|volume = 6|issue = 9|pages = e011788|pmid = 27601495|pmc = 5020738}}</ref> paper align with Servaes (1986)<ref name="Servaes, Jan 1986 pp. 73">Servaes, Jan (1986). Participatory Communication (Research) from a Freirean Perspective. ''Africa Media Review'' 10 (1), pp. 73–91.</ref> reference to the application of Participatory Communication (Research) from a Freirean Perspective by positing that for dialectical and emancipatory process of action and reflection that constitutes the "process of ''conscientization,'' where an agenda instead of defined by an academic elite and programs enacted by a bureaucratic elite for the benefit of an economic or political elite, participatory research involves people gaining an understanding of their situation, confidence and an ability to change that situation" (Servaes, 1986).<ref name="Servaes, Jan 1986 pp. 73"/> Therefore, the notion of Participatory Communication stresses the importance of cultural identity of local communities, and of democratisation and participation at all levels – international, national, local and individual. It points to a strategy, not merely inclusive of, but largely emanating from, the traditional 'receivers'. However one needs not to romanticize the use of such 'equity' methods. Sarveas(1986)<ref name="Servaes, Jan 1986 pp. 73"/> had outlined the following caution:
* Participatory research can all too easily be utilized as yet another tool of manipulation by vested interests.
* While the approach strives towards empowerment, challenges existing structures, and is consequently ideological, rigidly prescribed ideologies must be avoided
* In addition, knowledge and perspective gained may well empower exploitative economic and authoritarian interests instead of local groups.
* Far from helping the process of liberation, if the researcher is not careful, he or she may only enable the traditional policy-makers and vested interests to present their goods in a more attractive package.
* Even the best intentioned researcher/activist can inadvertently enhance dependency rather than empowerment. If she/he enters communities with ready-made tools for analyzing reality, and solving problems, the result will likely be that as far as those tools are successful, dependency will simply be moved from one tyrant to another".