Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Communication for development interventions in fragile states: a systematic review|
|Citation:||JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 2013; 11(3):1-190|
|Publisher:||Joanna Briggs Institute|
|Andrew Skuse, Dianne Rodger, Gerry Power, Domenic Friguglietti, Tait Brimacombe|
|Abstract:||BACKGROUND A wide range of contextual and programmatic factors frame, affect and constrain communication for development (C4D) interventions undertaken in fragile or conflict affected states. For the purposes of this review, contextual factors include culture, poverty, different stages of conflict (such as latent, open or post-conflict scenarios), policy, legislation and so on, while programmatic factors include the type of intervention, formative and summative evaluation, project design and management, human and financial resources and so on. Understanding the various factors that influence C4D interventions in fragile states is important to improving practice, implementation and evaluation, as well as to the future development of methodologies and frameworks that can be utilised in conflict or crisis situations. OBJECTIVE The objective of this review is to assess the contextual and programmatic factors that influence communication for development interventions in fragile states. TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS Persons regardless of age, gender and ethnicity - living in fragile states. PHENOMENA OF INTEREST The contextual and programmatic factors that influence communication for development (C4D) interventions in fragile states. TYPES OF STUDIES Qualitative peer reviewed studies, expert opinion, discussion papers, project reports, policy papers, position papers and other text. SEARCH STRATEGY Searches were conducted for published and unpublished material (between January 2001 - September 2011), including grey literature, in the English language. Databases searched were: Academic Search Premier; African Women’s Bibliographic Database; Anthropology Plus; Bibliography of Asian Studies; Educational Resources Information Centre; Ingenta Connect; JSTOR; Scopus; and Sociological Abstracts; Communication for Social Change Consortium; DevComm (World Bank); Eldis; Search for Common Ground; The Communication Initiative; United Nations Development Programme; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY Each identified source was critically appraised by two independent reviewers for methodological quality and thematic relevance prior to inclusion in the review. The appraisal process employed the System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (SUMARI) software developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. DATA COLLECTION Data was extracted using the standardised extraction tools. DATA SYNTHESIS Data were categorised and synthesised using standardised SUMARI extraction tools. This involved the identification of a set of analytical findings, followed by the allocation of specific categories representative of each, i.e. digital divide. A process of aggregation followed via which these initial categories were (where possible) collated into broader synthesised findings. The results of this process are set out in the form of a series of statements that represent a wider trend informed by the data. RESULTS A total of 239 sources were retrieved for detailed examination. 156 of these sources were excluded after review of the full paper/publication leaving 83 sources that were assessed for methodological quality using the SUMARI system. A total of 26 papers (19 qualitative papers and 7 textual/opinion pieces) were included in the review for appraisal and data extraction. A further 57 papers were assessed and excluded. Following extraction, a discussion was developed that examined the relevance of the findings from a realist perspective. CONCLUSIONS This review identifies that while different initiatives can be pursued in different conflict situations, their direction and content needs to be driven by a close understanding of context, which in turn i s driven by a range of influencing factors (contextual and programmatic), which in turn reflect and build upon existing C4D practice principles. While identifying influencing factors that affect C4D ...|
|Keywords:||C4D; communication for development; conflict; contextual; factors; fragile states; influence; outcomes; peacekeeping; programmatic; reduction; stability; violence|
|Rights:||Copyright status unknown|
|Appears in Collections:||Anthropology & Development Studies publications|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.