NGO’s and advocacy communications on sexual and reproductive health and rights: from the North to the South
Brief about:
Journal Article (2020)
Written by:
My research is part of a project which was carried out in a three year period and looks at and engages with particular important debates within development, especially focusing on gender equality and how NGOs are using communications to advocate for reproductive rights and health.
In this research, we have been talking to organisations that work on the topics of development of gender equality and minority rights, operating in a very challenging environment and tackling an important topic which people feel hasn’t been fully achieved as it should have.
The context in which these NGOs are working is highly fragmented and competitive when it comes to applying for funds at the same time were gender equality is somewhat stagnating, following the successes of the 80s and 90s.
So we examined over 50 organisations and NGOs, based both in the global north and the global south. While this is discussed differently across the world with the differences of locality, there is a consensus that there are attacks and a lot of misinformation and prejudice when it comes to homosexuality, women’s bodies, reproductive health, cultural and social barriers, which relate to the role of women in society the role of women in motherhood, the role of women in the biological reproduction.
And this has become more pronounced in the last decades across the globe, from Latin America to the US is to Europe, and particularly with a vote of far right populist groups actively exploring those topics for their own advantage in order to spread misinformation.
So there’s a lot of things that are being played out across the world and these organisations are trying to use the public health argument in the context of a lot of ideology and prejudice around gender equality and reproductive rights. And so this is a case study of how these organisations, including international as well as grassroots, have been active in the public sphere, influencing public decision and policy making.
Key findings
- All of the responses from the survey and in-depth interviews confirmed the difficulties of advocating for Sexual Reproductive Health Rights in a climate of political and religious opposition, as well as scarcity of funds for projects, combined with the pressing need to create wider awareness and knowledge so as to mobilize diverse publics to the cause.
- Most NGOs recognised the importance of the use of online communications for advocacy, however underlining its limits. Many argued that offline, lobbying, or face-to face advocacy with stakeholders or decision-making people was more effective than online tools.
- Of the 1,505 tweets collected from the organizations, many mingled emotional content with more "objective" facts, with some emphasizing one over the other. A total of 433 tweets were placed under "emotion" and another 922 on "reason," showing the predominance of advocacy communication practices on Sexual reproductive health rights through the appeal to scientific facts.
Proposed action
- Organizations should think about the use of media for different groups, in terms of thinking about the target audience and understanding the differences between connecting with the general public or connecting with policy makers
This changes the ways in which language is used, in particular communities you have to be very sensitive with language and social issues. In some communities it might be more effective to use more traditional media, such as posters whereas in other communities you could use social media.
- Developing and advocacy organizations should improve their internal as well as their external communications, thinking about how it engaged different publics, the mainstream media, thinking about how they engage people in the conversation using focus groups in order to give them voice
Comments
You must log in to ask a question
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Esther Feeken for preparation assistance
We would like to extend a special thank you to Esther Feeken, for their invaluable contribution in assisting the preparation of this research summary.
Are you a researcher looking to make a real-world impact? Join Acume and transform your research into a practical summary.
Already have an account? Log in
Discover more
NGO’s and advocacy communications on sexual and reproductive health and rights: from the North to the South
Cite this brief: Matos, Carolina. 'NGO’s and advocacy communications on sexual and reproductive health and rights: from the North to the South'. Acume. https://www.acume.org/r/ngos-and-advocacy-communications-on-sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-rights-from-the-north-to-the-south/
Brief created by: Dr Carolina Matos | Year brief made: 2022
Original research:
- Matos, C., ‘NGO’s and advocacy communications on sexual and reproductive health and rights: from the North to the South’ 22(2) (pp. 1–22) https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2020.1841813. – https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2020.1841813
Research brief:
My research is part of a project which was carried out in a three year period and looks at and engages with particular important debates within development, especially focusing on gender equality and how NGOs are using communications to advocate for reproductive rights and health.
In this research, we have been talking to organisations that work on the topics of development of gender equality and minority rights, operating in a very challenging environment and tackling an important topic which people feel hasn’t been fully achieved as it should have.
The context in which these NGOs are working is highly fragmented and competitive when it comes to applying for funds at the same time were gender equality is somewhat stagnating, following the successes of the 80s and 90s.
So we examined over 50 organisations and NGOs, based both in the global north and the global south. While this is discussed differently across the world with the differences of locality, there is a consensus that there are attacks and a lot of misinformation and prejudice when it comes to homosexuality, women’s bodies, reproductive health, cultural and social barriers, which relate to the role of women in society the role of women in motherhood, the role of women in the biological reproduction.
And this has become more pronounced in the last decades across the globe, from Latin America to the US is to Europe, and particularly with a vote of far right populist groups actively exploring those topics for their own advantage in order to spread misinformation.
So there’s a lot of things that are being played out across the world and these organisations are trying to use the public health argument in the context of a lot of ideology and prejudice around gender equality and reproductive rights. And so this is a case study of how these organisations, including international as well as grassroots, have been active in the public sphere, influencing public decision and policy making.
Findings:
All of the responses from the survey and in-depth interviews confirmed the difficulties of advocating for Sexual Reproductive Health Rights in a climate of political and religious opposition, as well as scarcity of funds for projects, combined with the pressing need to create wider awareness and knowledge so as to mobilize diverse publics to the cause.
Most NGOs recognised the importance of the use of online communications for advocacy, however underlining its limits. Many argued that offline, lobbying, or face-to face advocacy with stakeholders or decision-making people was more effective than online tools.
Of the 1,505 tweets collected from the organizations, many mingled emotional content with more “objective” facts, with some emphasizing one over the other. A total of 433 tweets were placed under “emotion” and another 922 on “reason,” showing the predominance of advocacy communication practices on Sexual reproductive health rights through the appeal to scientific facts.
Advice:
Organizations should think about the use of media for different groups, in terms of thinking about the target audience and understanding the differences between connecting with the general public or connecting with policy makers
- This changes the ways in which language is used, in particular communities you have to be very sensitive with language and social issues. In some communities it might be more effective to use more traditional media, such as posters whereas in other communities you could use social media.
Developing and advocacy organizations should improve their internal as well as their external communications, thinking about how it engaged different publics, the mainstream media, thinking about how they engage people in the conversation using focus groups in order to give them voice