Coordinating Media Assistance and Journalism Support Efforts

"Studies of the media development landscape worldwide have identified the lack of proper coordination between donors and implementing agencies as a key factor in undermining the resonance and impact of donor-funded projects."

This research report analyses the scope and focus of media assistance coordination efforts, highlighting common pitfalls and best practice models. It also offers recommendations for coordination models that could be used in future media assistance coordination efforts by donor and implementing organisations. The report was produced by the Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD)'s International Media Policy and Advice Centre (IMPACT) in cooperation with the Samir Kassir Foundation's SKeyes Centre for Media and Cultural Freedom and with support from, and in cooperation with, International Media Support (IMS). GFMD IMPACT is an initiative that seeks to help donors, funders, policymakers, practitioners, and other stakeholders make informed, evidence-based decisions on strategies, programming, funding, and advocacy for media development and journalism support.

The report is based on desk research and a series of interviews that were conducted in June 2022 with key stakeholders who have participated in coordination groups over the last five years. Case studies of historical and existing coordination mechanisms were identified to capture crosscutting issues. The report also taps into the previous experience of both of its authors in developing and participating in coordination projects in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.

A number of reasons for the need for coordination are discussed at the beginning of the report. For example, coordination plays an essential role in avoiding duplication or contradictions between programmes funded by different donors and offers an opportunity to explore synergies between complementary strands of work. In addition, coordination can help to harmonise or combine efforts to assess the needs of beneficiaries and to evaluate the impact of programming across a wide portfolio of projects. Dedicated coordination and information sharing can also enable media development actors to address diverse needs within any given media ecosystem and, therefore, ensure that the impact of any one project is not undermined or blunted by endemic weaknesses in the operating environment. The importance of effective coordination becomes particularly acute in crisis situations such as Ukraine, where international and local actors responded quickly and joined forces to support the country's media sector, which has been affected by the war.

Research findings related to existing practice are discussed according to the thematic areas around which coordination groups have been established, such as for developing holistic strategies, raising funds, organising emergency or crisis response, pooling resources, conducting needs assessment and joint research projects, sharing information, planning knowledge management, engaging in advocacy, and carrying out monitoring and evaluation (M&E). Key findings highlighted include:

• There is no default template for coordination groups, and most are shaped by the forces of circumstance. Typically, however, they comprise a cycle of scheduled meetings underpinned by shared databases, online groups, and bespoke events.
• All coordination mechanisms studied during the research have embraced information and knowledge sharing as their primary focus. Related activities have included mapping past, present, and future projects and keeping members informed of upcoming funding opportunities.
• Coordinating bodies have facilitated resource-sharing among their members in areas such as training and fundraising, but the potential for conducting joint needs assessments and quantitative or qualitative research has yet to be fully exploited.
• Several respondents interviewed during the study highlighted the value of collective M&E to track positive changes across media ecosystems, arguing that this would significantly reduce duplication of effort.
• In addition, coordination groups have engaged in advocacy, either by lobbying donors to commit funding to specific initiatives or by mobilising members around priority issues such as reforms to the legislative or regulatory environment.
• Strategic development remains the holy grail of coordination: an ambition to look at the bigger picture and determine how individual organisations can contribute to a national workplan based on agreed priorities and imperatives. However, experience shows that attempts to devise an overarching strategy are impeded by the rigid nature of funding programmes and overlapping agendas within the development community.
• Sharing information and exploring synergies should be fixtures of the media development landscape in any given country. The positive impact of such activities on value for money, aid effectiveness, and public perceptions of development programmes was recognised across the board and particularly in the context of the fundamental principles of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.

With regard to some of the challenges facing coordination attempts at national and regional level, the report highlights a number of issues. These include the inability to maintain stakeholder buy-in over a sustained period of time and widespread competition between implementing agencies, which is driven primarily by mechanisms used by donors to disburse funding. These market forces mean that agencies are often unwilling or unable to share the information that might give their rivals a competitive advantage. Moreover, the donor-implementer-recipient relationship remains top-down and is shaped by shifting programmatic priorities that may reflect political imperatives or ephemeral themes rather than actual needs.

The report acknowledges that there is no one-size-fits-all model for coordination. Each initiative of this kind needs to be adapted to the specific nature of the local operating environment. Based on the priorities and trends identified in the research, the report offers a best-practice approach that should include all or some of the following elements:

• Strong impartial leadership that ensures proper inclusion and full participation;
• A stable and predictable source of funding;
• Sufficient resources and skills to provide a consistent, tailored service to members;
• Adequate communications and knowledge-sharing platforms with guaranteed data security;
• A quorum of media development actors representing a balance of local and international organisations;
• An effective interface with the donor community (if donors are not directly involved in the coordination process);
• A good level of visibility and an ability to engage with multiple external stakeholders when required; and
• Sufficient agility and flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances.