Balancing the Act:

Sustainability of Community Media

BY ALFONSO GUMUCIO-DAGRON

Issues related to sustainability started interesting me in the mid eighties, when I

was the director of CIMCA a Bolivian NGO that specialised in communication for
development and social change, and supported the miners’ radio stations with training and
research. In 1983 I directed a documentary film for UNESCO called “The Voice of the
Mines,” and in 1988 we organised an international seminar, the first one of its kind, to
evaluate the Bolivian experience of community media that had survived 30 years with the
support of poor workers from the mines.

On the tightrope
For more than fifty years alternative, independent and public media have tried to
solve the puzzle of sustainability.
There is no single experience of community radio broadcasting, popular theater,
local television, participatory video or alternative press that has not gone through stages
where insufficient resources seemed to suffocate it.
The survival and development experience of community media resembles circus
performers who walk on the tightrope in delicate balance. They sometimes fall into the net
only to ascend to start all over again. The difference is that in community media most of
the time there is no net to cushion the fall. Many projects face too many challenges too
soon after they begin, and so never have the opportunity to stabilize in the community.
Only few community media experiences have survived without external support.
Almost all of them have had economical support from society’s civil institutions,
progressive churches, or international cooperation organizations. I was able to look at this
aspect while doing research for my book “Making Waves: Participatory Communication for
the Social Change”1: I found that most of the fifty experiences depicted in the book
depended to a greater or lesser extent on external contributions2.
Over the years, many experiences have emerged and were kept as development
program components with financing from international organizations. This was the case in
several projects to produce documentary and educational videos for rural development,
such as the FAO supported PRODERITH*, CESPAC** and CESPA*** in Mexico, Peru and
Mali, respectively. Another United Nations agency, UNESCO, helped to make possible the
development of community radio stations in Haiti, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Mozambique and

2
!
"
# $ %& ' (
)#* )+) , (( # )(
*
- .Spanish acronym for Programa de Desarrollo Rural Integrado del Trópico Húmedo [The
Program of Integrated Rural Development in the Tropical Wetlands]
**
- .Spanish acronym for Centro de Servicios de Pedagogía Audiovisual para la Capacitación
[Center for Audiovisual Pedagogy Services for Education]
***
- .French acronym for Centre de Services de Production Audiovisuelle [Center for Audiovisual
Production Services]
other Third World countries. In recent years UNESCO has supported Community
Multimedia Centers3, in collaboration with the International Development Research Center
(IDRC) of Canada, one of the most active organizations in the field of new information and
communication technologies. While UNICEF has supported Popular Theater in Nigeria,
and Community Public Address System (ComPAS) in Philippines, among others. There
would not be any community radio station in Madagascar, for example, if the Swiss
cooperation had not supported the creation of Radio Mampita in Fianarantsoa, in the
mountainous area of the island, and Radio Magneva in Morondava, on the western coast.
Although it appears to be a paradox, some governments have given their support
to create and maintain independent community media. In Mexico the indigenous radio
stations network arose from an initiative of the Indigenous National Institute (INI). Radio
Kothmale, in Sri Lanka — usually mentioned as an example of convergence between radio
and new technologies— has also had the government' s support, as well as Television
Serrana in Cuba and Radio Kiritimati in the nation island of Kiribati, in the Pacific.
The Progressive Catholic church has played a very important role in developing
community radio stations, particularly in Latin America. Since the 1950s, several hundred
community, urban and rural radio stations, have worked with the institutional support of the
church. Some of the more interesting examples include Radio Pio XII, in a mining region of
Bolivia, which was initially founded “to eradicate alcoholism and communism”; however,
very soon it was on the workers'side. Radio Kwizera, that serves refugees who arrive in
Tanzania escaping from the war between Tutsis and Hutus, is a project of the Jesuit
Refugee Service (JRS). Some of the outstanding experiences of community radio in Latin
America, like Radio Enriquillo (Dominican Republic), Radio Huayacocotla (Mexico), Radio
Quillabamba (Peru), or the very first one, Radio Sutatenza (Colombia), were founded
through the initiative of Catholic priests. Teatro La Fragua (Honduras) is another example
of an initiative led by the progressive Catholic church.
The development of local participatory communication experiences has also been
possible thanks to national and international non-government institutions in solidarity
alliances with civil society organizations. The video project of the Self-Employed Women'
s
Association SEWA (India) was born with the support of Martha Stuart Communications
(New York)4. This same organization supported, some years later, participatory video
initiatives in Nigeria (Action Health) and Egypt (Video & Community Dreams)5 Other
examples of this kind are the theater group Wan Smolbag, in Vanuatu, and the group of
independent video Maneno Mengi, in Tanzania.
There are relatively few experiences that come solely from the communities without
external support. The case of the miners’ radio stations in Bolivia is exceptional in this
regard. The miners' trade union radio stations were financed for many years with
contributions from workers who set aside one day’s salary in support of the radio stations.
Experiences based on community initiative have had to seek -at different stages of
their history- external solidarity support in order to progress. Bush Radio (South Africa),
which was born underground during the struggle against the apartheid, today has support
from Dutch cooperation. Radio Izcanal (El Salvador), founded by a group of refugees who

3
, (( + ( , &
,+,' + , (( &
+, '
( / ! !
4
- , (( , &
,0,'
5
+ ( ( / "
“Making Waves: Participatory Communication for the Social Change”]
%1
returned from Honduras, got the support of Communication Assistance Foundation (CAF)6,
also from Holland.
Every community communication experience is so distinct and specific that this
attempt to group them according to the origin of their financing sources, does not
accurately reflect the nature of the sustainability challenges they face.

Independence and sustainability

Does this mean that experiences of community communication, citizen
communication and participatory communication are unsustainable by themselves? Are
we therefore artificially maintaining projects that cannot survive without external support?
How have then some experiences survived throughout several decades?
There are several possible perspectives to analyze sustainability, and it would be a
great mistake to reduce the analysis only to economic factors. The fact that an
independent community-based communication experience is sustainable in economic
terms, or has achieved self-financing, does not guarantee that it fulfills the functions of
serving its audience and strengthening community voices.
Alternative, community or citizen communication cannot exist if it is not in relation
to the social dynamics within which it is developed. The raison d’etre of community
communication is the relationship that it establishes with its audience and the process of
community participation. Ultimately, it doesn't matter how the initiative has arisen, if there
is a process of community ownership that guarantees its autonomy and independence.
Economic sustainability is then just one factor among several others that determine
the sustainability of a community communication process. Other important factors include
social and institutional sustainability.
Social sustainability is depends on the participation of social actors and the ownership of
the communicative process. Without community participation, the communication
experience becomes an island amidst the human universe in which it operates. Radio
programming ought to reflect the needs of that human universe and support the
community’s political project.
Institutional sustainability is the framework that facilitates participatory processes. On the
one hand, it encompasses the existing regulatory environment and State policies, meaning
that the political atmosphere allows the experience to develop without censorship and
external pressures. On the other hand, the regulatory environment deals with procedures
and human and labor relationships within the community radio, that is, the internal
democracy, decision-making mechanisms and management transparency.
There is no magic formula for integral sustainability of community media. However, the
three components —social, institutional and economic— should be taken into account to
achieve a balance that allows not only the survival, but also the development of
participatory communication processes. In this reflection, I aim to demonstrate that without
a balance among these three factors, sustainability is impossible in the medium and long
term.

Institutional Sustainability
6
( " 2 %
 The history of the last fifty years shows us that, at least in the context of Third
World countries, the ideal conditions have never been present for experiences of
alternative and participatory communication to develop. Nonetheless, this has not
prevented thousands of experiences from multiplying in Latin America, Europe, North
America, and more recently in Africa and Asia.
Mass media in the hands of private national and transnational companies do not
encourage the growth of alternative media, fearing it could reduce their power. For them,
it is an economic and political issue. The intimate relationships between mass media
owners and democratic or dictatorial governments have been broadly demonstrated in
several studies7.
The privatization and deregulation process of the radioelectric spectrum, boosted
by multilateral financing organizations, has worsened a situation characterized by the
concentration of media in a few hands and the expansion of corporate media networks
beyond national borders. The cases of Televisa and TV Azteca in Mexico, as well as
Grupo Globo and Grupo Abril in Brazil, are significant, but even in smaller countries the
same tendency can be observed. Four television channels and a network of dozens of
radio stations in Guatemala belong to a single individual, Ángel González González, a
Mexican who lives in Miami, where he watches over his investments in media in Nicaragua
and Costa Rica.
Over several decades, Latin American community radio stations have fought for
recognition by the State. After having been victims of military dictatorships and other
authoritarian governments, they struggled for many years to have a legislation that
recognized their existence and their relevance as community media that develops social
and cultural programs for the benefit of the population. Some countries were successful in
establishing a legislation that differentiates between private commercial radio stations and
community radio stations that don’t seek only economic gain, but rather have cultural and
educational goals.
As a result of that sustained effort for many years, community radio stations multiplied
particularly in the Andean countries, such as Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador, and also in
Central America. By the end of the 1990s an approximate estimate established that over
five thousand community radio stations operated in the region, with over two thousand in
the Peruvian territory alone.
During the 60s and 70s many Latin American governments, even those that were
authoritarian, tolerated the growth of community radio stations. The situation has changed
abruptly, since the privatization wave of the 1990s which has deeply affected the
community media situation and in some countries has meant a setback. In several
countries, where community radio stations were recognized and regulated, the
governments are today selling the same radio frequencies to private or multinational
companies by means of public tender where the highest bidder obtains the licenses. In this
way, media is accumulated in fewer hands and thousands of community radio stations are
loosing the authorization to operate and are left outside of the margins of the law. The
Guatemala case is particularly sad. Almost 70 local radio stations, most of them operated
by Mayan native communities, have been declared illegal. Recently, an announcement by
the commercial radio stations managers' association, called upon the Guatemalan
government “to imprison the directors of pirate radio stations, to capture their transmission
equipment and to recover the frequencies.”

7
# )( "
# 3 + % *4 / 5! 6 & '
(
 In countries like Bolivia or Peru, where community radio stations were firmly
established, governments have not been able to silence them, and they therefore
experience constant threats. Legislation no longer protects the stations, or it only does in
an ambiguous way, while on the other hand, there are no State policies stimulating their
development. In El Salvador, community radio stations had to compete with commercial
ones to purchase frequencies. With ARPAS8’ support, two FM frequencies were obtained
through which about 20 community radio stations broadcast with a careful segmentation of
their geographic coverage.
These “macro” factors have undoubtedly had enormous influence on the
development of community media. In Africa, where the development of community radio
stations is relatively recent, the legislation issue is varied. There are countries like South
Africa and Benin whose legislation protects community radio stations, but in other
countries, legislation doesn' t even recognize a difference between private and community
radio stations. Many private local stations are considered “community radio stations”, but
there is no clear description of what defines this category. In the upcoming years, this lack
of distinction could lead to a concentration of radio stations in private networks, and to the
sale of frequencies at auctions, as happened in Latin America.
Regulation is even less frequent for new information and communication
technologies (ICTs). Despite the fact that “cyber-cafés” or telecenters have spread around
the whole planet, very few Third World countries have discussed legislation, and when
they have, they have been guided by the interests of big manufacturers of hardware,
software and services providers. No regulations exist to differentiate models implemented
as businesses,particularly those “Internet-cafes” in urban centers- from community
telecenters with clear objectives of social development, which are generally located in
isolated rural areas.
Legislation is not sufficient, if it is not accompanied by development policies.
National Governments have the obligation to ensure access to new information
technologies the same way they guarantee the functioning of public schools and libraries.
Governments should take the responsibility of guaranteeing free access to information, as
a platform for a democratic society.
The legislation, regulation and state policies that we have previously analyzed
determine to a great extent the institutional sustainability of community media, particularly
radio stations or independent television stations, but they do not constitute the only factors.
There are many examples of community radio stations that have consolidated and grown
in spite of threats and aggression they have suffered at the hands of authoritarian
governments. This indicates that there are other aspects that directly impact institutional
sustainability, such as: media ownership, internal organization, working relationships, and
management transparency.
Community media ownership is the first decisive factor for internal sustainability.
Ownership of the communicative process cannot be disassociated from the structure of
ownership of the means to create community media. Who do frequencies, facilities and
equipment belong to? It is evident that if they belong to institutions outside of the
community, there must be a negotiation process, so that the communication medium
serves collective interests.
Bolivian miners radio stations, since their beginning have been a owned by their
communities and for this reason several times they suffered attacks to destroy their

8
Spanish acronym for ) 7 ( ! *5 ! 1
5 ( ) (*5 ! 8
antennas, their transmission equipment and their recording files. Some mining radio
stations still have the scars of firearm shots on their walls or in their destroyed equipment.
In the auditorium of the Mining Workers Union of Colquiri, workers painted a great mural
where airplanes are shown bombarding their radio station, Radio Vanguardia, in the
1960s.
Relatively few community media outlets really belong to the community. Many community
radio stations in Latin America, for example, belong to NGOs, to progressive Catholic
Church sectors, and even to governments. New information and communication
technology projects, that is to say, telecenters or community multimedia centers are
generally the property of international cooperation organizations, as components of wider
programs for development.
The working relationships constitute another fundamental aspect in the institutional
sustainability. Who appoints the community radio directors or telecenters managers? How
are the technical or artistic personnel hired? Is there a gender balance among staff?
Community participation cannot be aimed for without transparency and participation in
management and programming within the community media. Unfortunately, internal
democracy is not a norm in community media, and it endangers community participation
and the process of ownership.
In participatory communication, neither censorship nor imposition can exist, but
rather dialogue and consensus. In a community radio station it is indispensable that
programmers, program producers and journalists feel absolute political and creative
freedom. A community radio should not reproduce the same patterns of avoiding real
issues that commercial radio has.
This is also reflected in workers’ contractual situation, and their rights to social
security and other benefits granted by labor laws. In community radio stations, the balance
among waged personnel and volunteers, who also contribute in programming or promotion
tasks, is sometimes very fragile. The mixture of volunteerism and professionalism
sometimes creates institutional conflicts that endanger sustainability.
For example, in Madagascar, orientation and programming of Mampita and
Magneva radio stations are discussed in the general assembly of all associate rural
organizations with rural representatives'participation. In the Philippines, the barangay —a
group of local authorities— appoints a Community Media Council (CMC) to manage
community public address systems and radio stations of the Tambuli network. In
Nicaragua, the most important decisions in Radio La Primerísima are taken by the
assembly, which is composed of radio workers and members of the listening community.
In this case, in the assemblies, the voices and the votes of journalists, anchors, executive
personnel, cleaning staff, and some listeners belonging to APRANIC9, are equably
respected. Every two years the general assembly chooses a Directive Board that makes
decisions related to radio daily operation.
Finally, another aspect that contributes to the institutional sustainability and also to
economic sustainability is the rationality of decisions related to technological resources,
i.e., the technical dimension that supports the political and communicative project. The
physical structure design, as well as the quantity and quality of equipment have
consequences for sustainability.

9
Spanish acronym for Asociación de Profesionales de la Radiodifusion Nicaraguense, [Nicaraguan Radio Broadcasting
Professionals'Association] founded in 1990.
 To put too much emphasis on the technological inputs is as harmful as to
underestimate them. Many years ago, I visited the regional radio station of Bobo
Dioulasso, in southern Burkina Faso. It had several large and fully equipped recording
studios, and a very sophisticated Mobile Unit. However, the radio station did not even
produce one hour of weekly programming. The studios and equipment were donated by a
German cooperation agency, but the radio station lacked both personnel and of a policy on
information and programming. Their daily work was to re-broadcast the news from the
national radio station, Radio Ouagadougou. Meanwhile a thick layer of dust covered the
equipment and the studios and weeds grew around the mobile unit because its tires were
flat and there was “no money” to fix them. Clearly, the real needs had been over looked.
The community public address systems in the Philippines are an example of the opposite.
Their dynamic function within the community has been so important that several
communities, starting from an “audio tower” experience, decided to upgrade to a
community radio station. This is an example of rationality concerning the kind of equipment
that was really needed. They began with a minimum of equipment, with coverage of three
or four kilometers, and then they increased it according to the real community needs.
In occasions, it is not the quantity but the quality of technology that endangers
sustainability. “Free Play” transistor radios are an example. They work with crank handles
and have been distributed in many countries of Africa. The concept is interesting: a
receiver radio set that does not require batteries to work, with a crank handle that allows
the set to recharge energy manually in 20 to 40 minutes, depending on the model,
avoiding battery expenses, which are prohibitive for most of the rural population in the
Third World. However, sometimes the technology does not respond to real needs. In 1999
I visited the refugee camp of Great Lukole in Tanzania, and I gathered opinions on the
crank handle radios that had been donated: the crank is made of plastic and it breaks after
certain time; its battery is very limited, so it is necessary to constantly recharge the radio;
additionally the receiver is too large and expensive when comaired with the battery models
that can be bought in rural markets. Some refugees that I interviewed preferred the
battery-radios10 or even adapted the Free Play models donated by cooperation agencies,
to run on batteries.
With the arrival of new information and communication technologies in the 1990s, new
distortions that affect sustainability have taken place. Often, digital equipment is
incompatible with the rest of equipment in a community radio, and in other cases it is
underused due to the lack of training. Programming automation, by means of computers,
is not always the best solution because it alters one of the essential characteristics of
community radios, its “live” quality. Automation almost always results into more music and
less spontaneity.
The thought that goes into designing a telecenter is even more critical because computer
equipment is more fragile and has a shorted life span than radio equipment. It is
unthinkable that a telecenter would operate for 10 or 15 years with the original equipment,
as happens in many community radio stations. After three or four years computers are
usually already obsolete. In Africa, telecentres were established in places where electric
power and telephone problems had not been solved yet, which make evident a lack of
planning. A survey conducted in 1999 among community telecenter users in Timbuktu,
revealed that their main interests in visiting the telecenter —in order of importance— were
to: listen to the radio, watch television, read newspapers, use the telephone and mail

10
Models made in China cost less than US$ 16 in local markets.
letters; the Internet did not even appear in the list. The same study revealed that 51% of
the local population had never made a simple telephone call.
In most of the telecentres that I have visited, the capacity and versatility of computers
needed had been overestimated. The most advanced users, when they do not go there to
use the telephone or read newspapers, use only the basic software (electronic mail, word
processor, games and occasionally the Internet), less than 10% of the installed capacity.
In fact, this does not differ much from the use of computers by most people in
industrialized countries where also a minimum percentage of the installed capacity is used.
However, in poor countries the purchase of sophisticated equipment and their under-use
do not contribute to sustainability and even outlines an ethical problem. How is investment
in expensive equipment justified when certain basic community necessities have not been
addressed? How can centers equipped with new technologies of information and
communication contribute to solving the population' s more urgent needs? It is certain that
in many telecenter projects on the commercial or institutional agendas seem to be above
the real community needs.
Based on the previous facts, Simputer' s promise is attractive: a very simple tablet PC,
developed in India, with an approximate cost of US $250, and with the capacity to satisfy
the essential needs of 90% of users.
Finally, institutional sustainability should not only be analysed from the perspective of
isolated experiences, but also in connection with the relations that are established with
other participatory, citizen and alternative communication initiatives. The strengthening of
networks, for example, is an additional guarantee of the survival and development of
community media. In societies that are impoverished by economic exploitation,
and where civil society has withdrawn its trust from the political class and the
traditional institutions, the emergence of new networks of social actors that gather
around community problems, is the appropriate environment for sustainability.
Social sustainability
The definition of the political and communicational project is the basis for social
sustainability because it in dicates which route to take in the long-run. Who participates in
the project definition? How are the main decisions regarding information policy and
programming taken?
No community process can be sustainable if it does not have community support, and if it
does not represent the community in its programming and in its information policy. Social
sustainability has to do with organizational, cultural and linguistic aspects, inherent to the
ownership of the communication process. An experience of community communication is
legitimated when its political and communicational mission represents the audience’s
aspirations. Its linkage with social actors is what guarantees its consolidation and its
permanence throughout time.
Many experiences of community media have failed due to their lack of connection with the
social actors they are supposed to represent. When grassroots voices stop expressing
themselves through community media, an ideological separation takes place between the
medium and its actors. The process of social appropriation is diminished and interrupted.
Therefore, the political and communicational project remains alien to community
aspirations.
This risk has been constant in the history of community radio stations, all the way back to
the first experience in Latin America. In 1947 Radio Sutatenza (Colombia) was founded to
empower rural population voices of the Tenza Valley, where 80% of peasants were
illiterate. However, in a few years the radio turned into a national distance education
network11 centralizing its operations in Bogotá. The community-based participatory
experience was very short, although the new approach had other virtues.
Among the constituent elements of social sustainability, the ownership of the
communication process is perhaps the most important. It takes place through the
participation of social actors in community media management. For a rural medium that
operates in a limited geographical area —as is the case with the community public
address systems, popular theater or FM radio stations— participation is immediate through
relationships with social organizations, groups of women, cooperatives, or youth groups.
On the other hand, if it is a medium has wider coverage —as it is the case of AM radio
stations— participation takes place through mail or telephone, or by agreements with
social organizations representing the population as a whole.
Video SEWA (India), the group of women video-makers from Gujarat, is an example of
direct participation, where the owners who are stallholder women in markets, participate in
the production of documentary videos about their reality. Some of them are illiterate and
can hardly distinguish the camera symbols that allow them to operate the technology of
the video. The fact that they belong to a large association that represents women from the
informal economy, makes possible a seamless relationship between the collective and its
social base.
Because of its national coverage Radio La Primerísima (Nicaragua) has other
mechanisms for allowing the audience to participate. It is a “live” radio, which means that
at any moment during a program, telephone calls are received and the audience’s
comments are aired, without filtering the calls. The doors of the radio station are also
permanently open. After waiting a few minutes, visitors can go directly into the
broadcasting booth.
The ownership of the communication process has to do as well with the demystification of
technology and with the strengthening of the audience’s critical capacity. New
technologies allow easy access to people with very different levels of education who
become quickly communicators of their social, cultural, economic and political reality. This
learning process and technological expertise have taken place in all participatory
communication experiences we know. Youths from Bolivian mines or Tutsi refugees in
Ngara learned how to operate radio equipment, the same way as SEWA market women
and Kayapo indians from Brazil got familiar with video cameras.
Cultural and linguistic pertinence is another factor contributing to social sustainability of the
community political and communicational project. Alternative, citizen' s and community
media express culture —in its broadest sense—corresponding to the human universe in
which it develops.
This explains the enormous development of Latin American radio stations that broadcast
in indigenous languages such as Aymara or Quechua in Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru, or in
some of the thirty indigenous languages of Guatemala and Mexico. Attempts to assimilate
indigenous populations through formal education systems that prioritize the teaching of
Spanish, face indigenous nations’ determination to continue expressing themselves in their
own languages12.

11
&
), 9': ) 7 , 1 , ) 8
12
9 + ; , 3 ( ! (
+ 3 < = ( ! (
( ! ( ( > (
Language and culture are the means of expression and communication among identities
and within identities. The conditions of cultural exchange through communication
processes are more balanced when different cultures can express themselves on equal
terms. Radio, more than any other media, has allowed a certain level of linguistic and
cultural democracy. On the other hand, new information and communication technologies
(ICTs) constitute the expression of the hegemonic Western culture that translates into a
dominant position of English and some European languages over all others. This is one of
the reasons why the sustainability of telecentres is so precarious, particularly in Third
World community environments: access is restricted to those who speak and write in
English.
Sustainability of the ensemble of alternative and participatory media experiences
strengthens when cultural pertinence becomes a norm for all of them. They reinforce each
other as identity strengthens with cultural diversity. Cultures that negotiate their cultural
diversity with other cultures, should do so from the strength of their identity, and not from a
subordinate surrendered position. The tendency towards cultural homogenization implicit
in the globalization process, can annul identities and impoverish diversity. Community
media have a very important role to play in defending the rights to language and culture.
The development of local contents in participatory and citizen's media is another aspect of
social sustainability, closely related to cultural pertinence. The capacity to create
programming that responds to community demands and interests is one of the strengths of
community media. The origin of many community radio experiences is an immediate
service to community through social interest announcements. Therefore, it is not strange
for a community radio station to become a post office, department of complaints and even
a meeting place. Youths meet at the radio station, women complain about the prices of
goods , teachers notify students that there will not be classes the next day, and the nurse
announces dates for the next vaccination campaign.
Community radio stations have always offered this kind of service, from informing on the
prices of agricultural products in the market to information about transportation problems.
Radio Mampita in Madagascar transmits announcements about lost or stolen pets, and helps
to identify them so that owners may recover them.
The community media programming structure is a mirror image of its effect on the
community and of the level of participation and ownership. In Tacunan, Davao del Norte
(The Philippines), the community is in charge of broadcasting programs through the
community public address system. The nurse conducts a weekly program about health
and the teacher a program about education, and community volunteers have other
programs on agriculture, youth, women' s rights and cooperativism.
Radio Kothmale (Sri Lanka), is aware of the need to research topics to serve local
population and it uses new technologies to develop themes requested by the audience,
and to spread them through the radio station in local languages. Kothmale has been
mentioned many times as an early example of the convergence between community radio
and new technologies.
In Nicaragua, Radio La Primerísima facilitates the communication between Nicaraguans
who work in Costa Rica and their families who remain back in their country. This live
program, connected to Radio Cucú in San José, has helped to reunite families who had no
contact for months or years. In a similar way, Radio Kwizera (Tanzania) sends messages

+ ( ((
" %
from refugees in the camps along the Tanzanian border to their families in Burundi and
Rwanda, with whom they had lost contact due to the war and genocide.
Telecentres have a lot to learn from community radio stations to ensure their social
sustainability. It is important to put an end to the myth that information access is a solution
for development problems. Community telecentres should be inserted in community' s daily
lives, and provide specific, and appropriate information to meet local needs.
Niety percents of the content on the World Wide Web is alien to 90% of the needs of the
world’s population. Therefore in Chennai (India), the Village Knowledge Centers13 use
Internet to provide local information through an access network of computers powered with
solar energy, they connect to the “value added center” through a wireless system. Rural
settlers from four communities can consult information on the prices of agricultural
products in the markets, micro-credit facilities, local veterinarians or the weather forecast
for the week. This model prioritizes local needs rather than simple access to the Web.
Instead of the World Wide Web with millions of pages in English that have nothing to do
with Pondichery settlers, the Swaminathan Foundation has preferred to develop a local
mini-web that offers practical answers to its users in its value added center.
It is not enough that a community medium is recognized, but it also has to have impact
and concrete actions in support of the objectives of community organization and
development. Being recognized is not enough if a communication process is limited to the
search for popularity. Often community radio stations are appreciated because they are
dedicated to broadcasting music throughout the day, but do not have any impact on local
problems nor do they contribute to social, economic and cultural development. Likewise,
there are community telecentres that lack a participatory development policy, however
they are recognized because they provide telephone, fax or e-mail services. In the
analysis of social sustainability, it is very important to establish the difference between
popularity and the capacity to contribute to social transformations.
Perhaps definitive evidence of social sustainability is when communities defend their own
media at the risk of their lives. In 1980, a military coup d'
etat took place in Bolivia and the
military shut down all media offices in the cities. The army advanced towards the mining
centers to attack community radio stations that continued airing in spite of the prohibition,
and found resistance in workers, women and peasants from neighboring areas. Armed
with dynamite, sticks, and stones, they protected and defended Radio Animas, Radio La
Voz del Minero, and Radio Nacional de Huanuni, among others. Similarly, in Nicaragua in
1997 residents of poor neighbourhoods of Managua surrounded Radio La Primerísima
with sticks, stones and firearms, to defend it from occupation attempts.
Economic sustainability
We left economic sustainability for the end because it generally appears first when
community media sustainability analysis are made.
Community, citizen' s, and/or alternative communication media should look for resources
that allow them to finance their activities, to renovate their equipment from time to time, to
cover the costs of services, to pay staff and to invest in the development of new
programming; all of this in order to provide a better service to the community.
The same legislation that favors community radio stations in some countries and
recognizes them as institutions developing supportive activities for education, culture and
development, on the other hand limit their possibilities by barring them from self-financing
through advertising. In countries where legislation exists, community radio stations are
13
( +5 5 ( &
+55 '
forbidden to generate their own resources through advertising, and their broadcasting
power is often also limited. This is in contradiction with the policies for freedom of
expression and cultural diversity.
If some coherence existed in State policies, radio stations and community telecentres
should receive the same support as public schools, libraries or national cultural projects.
This does not mean that the State should interfere with political and communication
projects, but rather should support their development as autonomous and decentralized
entities.
Decentralization and popular participation policies, adopted by several countries in Latin
America and Africa in the last fifteen years, can be an ideal framework to strengthen local
community media. In Uganda, the community telecentres of Nakaseke, Buwama and
Nabweru —founded with the support of UNESCO, ITU and the International Development
Research Center (IDRC)— receive small subsidies from local governments that have
acquired autonomy and decision power thanks to the decentralization process.
Should the National Government provide financial support to community media? Should
legislation allow community media to generate income through advertising?
These two questions embody risks. If financing comes from the State, there could be
political and administrative interference by governments, as has happened to Indigenous
National Institute (INI) radio stations in Mexico. Likewise, if financing comes essentially
from advertising, there is the risk of falling into the hands of private companies controlling
media through advertising accounts, by imposing norms and self-censorship mechanisms.
From the point of view of financial sustainability, the ideal solution would be to achieve a
balance among: the generation of income from advertising and agreements, the support
by national institutions, international cooperation organizations and solidarity groups
outside the community, as well as contributions from communication media workers and
the community itself. .
Support from national institutions seems to be the most frequent pattern in the
development of participatory radio, and in the establishment of the community telecenters
at a smaller scale. Most community radio stations in Latin America, Africa and Asia
continue functioning primarily due to the support they receive from NGOs, universities and
the progressive Catholic Church. Radio stations' fundamental expenses such as
equipment acquisition, staff wages and payment of services (electricity, telephone,
internet), are often covered through contributions from national organizations. Most are in
fact institutional projects, although they may identify with a participatory communication
approach. Some of the most remarkable experiences in terms of their commitment to the
community belong to this category.
Often, National Governments support community radio stations, at least partially. During
the last two decades the Institute for Social Communication (ISC) in Mozambique has
established a dozen community radio stations in head provincial cities around the country.
Besides equipment and training that these stations initially received, the ISC covers the
costs of services (electricity, telephone, maintenance) and the wages of five or six
permanent staff. It is the responsibility of the stations is to obtain additional funds for
programming, in agreement with local institutions.
International cooperation has also been very important for community media projects,
mainly through equipment donations and training support. North European cooperation
agencies (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Holland) have worked together in many community
media projects, mainly where freedom of speech is threatened. UNESCO provided
additional equipment and training for a network of local radio stations in Indonesia; it
established four community radio stations in Haiti; and eight in Mozambique, among other
projects spread in the world.
International cooperation agencies do not often finance wages or services, because their
own internal regulations prevent them from doing so, unless they are communication
projects that are part of larger development programs, for example FAO’s rural video
projects in Peru, Mexico and Mali. However, there are other support modalities from
cooperation and development agencies. Community radio stations can generate resources
through programming and co-production agreements. This formula has a comparative
advantage over income from advertising because the programming content benefits the
community as well. When I visited Radio Kwizera (Tanzania) in 1999, it had the support of
Oxfam, the Norwegian People’s Aid, the World Food Program, UNICEF, the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other organizations to carry out
programs on drinking water, human rights, conflict resolution, and health, among other
topics. Plan International supports Radio Gune Yi, a radio program carried out with
Senegalese children in rural communities.
The Nalamdana Theater (India), the multimedia project Soul City (South Africa), Radio
Sagarmatha (Nepal), Carpa Lila (Bolivia), the Action Health’s video unit (Nigeria), Aarohan
Theater (Nepal) and many other projects in community media, have received financing
from organizations such as UNICEF, DANIDA, UNFPA, PANOS, DFID, USAID, Action Aid,
Ford Foundation, CECI, UNESCO, and others, to produce educational programs on sexual
and reproductive health, AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. HIV/AIDS is a
topics that receives a great amount of support because it is among the top priorities on the
agenda of large cooperation agencies.
Contrary to the street theater, radio, puppet or video experiences previously mentioned,
telecentres projects are less sustainable because most of them lack a programming policy
to include content that is useful for the community. One of the most frequent criticisms of
telecenters is that technology seems to be the end, rather than the means to reach other
development objectives. Many of these projects have been set up without consultation with
the communities, and without a sense of the actual needs of the population they pretend to
serve. Undoubtedly, in many cases there is a business motivation to sell computer
technology rather than criteria of development for social change.
International solidarity has been very important for participatory communication initiatives
that were not born under the shade of an institution or a development agency. Mostly
through specific supportive actions they guarantee the survival of community media in
situations of high risk and threats. These are important for economic sustainability
because they occur outside the margins of institutional agendas and are the result of
communication without borders based on solidarity.
Often, when miners’ radio stations in Bolivia were shut down by the army, and their
equipment was destroyed or confiscated, the solidarity of European groups allowed them
to broadcast again. The same happened to Radio La Primerísima (Nicaragua) when their
power plant and transmitter was sabotaged in 1990, solidarity committees from Catalunya,
Valencia and other regions of Spain, as well as NGOs from Germany, Austria, Italy and
Australia, in addition to AMARC, gave their support for the purchase of a new transmitter.
Advertising can be a complement for economic sustainability, but should never be the
main source of income, because it could distort the objectives and the political and
communicational project from an alternative and participatory approach, to a commercially
driven operation. In rural areas, where community radio stations are the population'
s most
important cultural and social reference, local advertising can support economic
sustainability.
It is not peculiar for rural community radio stations to announce the town'
s bakery, the drug
store or a restaurant to increase their earnings. Radio Izcanal (El Salvador), Radio
Quillabamba (Peru), and many other radio stations broadcast advertising messages for
businesses in their area of influence or messages from government institutions.
The Gaseleka Community Telecenter is one of the most important experiences in South
Africa. Its manager’s initiatives have allowed income generation activities beyond those
needed for its maintenance. The center offers services that are not limited to Internet
users. As with other community radio stations, the Gaseleka Telecenter is a post office,
and provides services like the issuance of identity documents in coordination with the
national department of identification. People do not need to travel to the city to have their
pictures taken and to submit their documents, since two agents from the National Identity
Service do the work at the telecenter once a week.
The importance of community contributions in economic sustainability is often
underestimated. We have mentioned before how Bolivian miners donated a day of their
wages to maintain their radio stations. In Burkina Fasso I visited local radio stations that
had been established in the 1980’s in rural communities, where the population contributed
diesel to power the generators. In other examples, radio stations charge small quantities of
money for announcements such as birthdays, deaths, music dedications, messages, mail
delivery, lost objects, and so on.
However, cash contributions are not the only way a community can support the economic
sustainability of their media. In every community media project voluntary work is one of the
most important factors for economic and social sustainability, although it is certain that it
also may become a risk factor for institutional sustainability. We have already seen that in
many radio stations, programming is the responsibility of community volunteers or local
social organizations. These voluntary efforts may save resources that would be necessary
to pay producers and announcers; however, when community radio stations invest a lot
time and energy training volunteers they often do not have the dedication to collaborate
usefully.
In some cases, communities have contributed by providing the land where the telecenter
or the community radio station is located, or the materials used in the construction of the
premises. Participation is very common —especially in the Andean region of Latin
America— through community collective work to build the premises for the radio stations
or broadcasting plants. This is how communities finance the political and communicational
project and support the economic sustainability of alternative and community media.
In alternative and community media projects that have a well defined social political
orientation, the alliances between media, and social and union organizations can
contribute to balance economic sustainability, or to offer an institutional support.
Conclusion
There is no ideal formula to guarantee the sustainability of community media, its
survival and development largely depends on the balance among social, institutional and
economic sustainability factors. Participatory communication processes that involve
communities and contribute to strengthen local organization have better prospects of
sustainability than those institutional projects characterized by limited access and
participation.
On the other hand, sustainability should not only be analyzed from the perspective of
isolated experiences, but also with respect to the relationships established among
alternative, participatory, and citizen' s media. Networks creation, for example, is an
additional guarantee for community media survival and development. In societies
impoverished by exploitation, where civil society has withdrawn its trust from the political
class, parties and traditional institutions, the emergence of new relationships of social
actors, grouped around community problems, constitutes a favorable environment for
sustainability.
What we have to keep in mind when referring to sustainability is that communication
processes should have a dimension that the community is able to assume. The ownership
process can only be achieved when the community assumes the process in all its aspects:
from the communication policy, to the technology and management. It is better to begin
with limited resources and grow with the community rather than to establish vertical and
over-ambitious projects that because of their cost or technology will limit the room for
community participation.
The constant global homogenization project threatens the survival of political and
ideological pluralism. Spaces for the expression of cultural diversity are much more closed
and global flows of information are in the hands of a few multinational companies. The
expansion of economic power and the tricky adoption of market laws, not only destroy
national industries and agricultural production of the poorest countries, but also have a
negative impact on education, culture and all forms of social organization.
In the midst of this discouraging world panorama, alternative communication continues
with the important task of strengthening cultural identities and the development of new
expressions in civil society. Sustainability is above all the result of the political commitment
of social actors.
The classic approach of evaluators, who are used to quantitative approaches to measure
communication and social change with calculators, is in direct conflict with the idea that the
sustainability of community media is ruled by other principles. We need fewer accountants
and more sociologists to evaluate the impact of alternative, participatory and citizen' s
media. The dynamics of participatory communication processes cannot be measured in
figures, but rather through the understanding of social issues and in relation to the rights of
expression and free access to information for the poorest peoples.
Participatory communication processes are not linear and homogeneous. Therefore, they
require an effort of understanding and empathy, to acknowledge the specificity and
diversity of experiences. As Clemencia Rodríguez says:
“I believe it is precisely this explosion of communication at the local level that
makes citizen’s media into empowering tools for democracy. The disruption of
established relations of power is a “messy” enterprise, and our attempts to impose
order and organization will only cause our alienation from these processes”14

14
4, ( & ' + . 5 , 4 ?+
, -@ A5).B ( ;