The catalyst performs an influential communication role in facilitating the flow of information in the community development process. A catalyst may oversee many roles, such as community insider and outsider, agent of policies and change (Figueroa et al., 2002), community workers or practitioners. Mokoena and Moeti (2017) argue that community development workers can be a participatory change agent for community development as they facilitate community participation in community development plans and in policymaking and implementation. In this regard, catalysts play a vital role in CSC in communities because they stimulate dialogue within the community and facilitate cooperative action and eventual solutions (Doan-Bao, Papoutsaki, & Dodson, 2018; Figueroa et al., 2002).
30
The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD] (2015) suggested that women can be catalysts for rural transformation provided that gender-based constraints are effectively eliminated. Women farmers play a vital role in environmental conservation by using stability and resilience for crop biodiversity, which both challenges and adapts to climate change and market volatility (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD], 2015).
Doan-Bao et al. (2018) have contextualised the catalyst role in the model of LIN Centre for Community Development in the context of Vietnam. The evidence from their research found that social trust and networks among non-profit organization staff shaped LIN as a catalyst for community development in Ho Chi Minh City. However, their research pointed out the challenges of the model in applying the “Western concepts of community development and tenets of participatory social change in the Vietnamese context”(p. 1). Their research emphasises the need to appropriately adapt various communication approaches to local contexts.
Figure 12: Suggested revised catalyst model for community development in Vietnam Source: Doan-Bao et al., 2018
31
Figueroa et al. (2002) have developed an integrated model for either measuring the process and outcomes of CSC, or a catalyst model of CSC. This model emphasises community dialogue and collective action (Figueroa et al., 2002; Parks et al., 2005). Participation is essential to the model (Figueroa et al., 2002), and uses a horizontal approach (bottom-up) through the transference of ownership, direct communication and control to the relevant community (Parks et al., 2005). The model was used to measure individual and social change through communication dialogue and collective action, which lead to a resolution of common problems. This model can also be regarded as a catalyst model for social change. The model is a process that attempts to engender community dialogue and collective action, in order to bring changes to the community and well-being to its members (Figueroa et al., 2002).
Figure 13: Integrated Model of Communication for Social Change Source: Figueroa et al., 2002
32
To evaluate and measure social change, Figueroa et al. (2002) suggest seven outcome indicators: 1) Leadership, 2) degree and equity of participation, 3) information equity, 4) collective self-efficacy, 5) sense of ownership, 6) social cohesion, and 7) social norms. Sub- dimensions of the integrated model guide these indicators. These outcome indicators can be achieved through community dialogue and collective action under the participatory communication approach.
Table 2: List of Social Change Outcome Indicators and its Dimensions for Measurement Source: Figueroa et al., 2002
Indicator Dimension
Leadership Extent of leadership
Equity and diversity Flexibility
Competence in encouraging and securing dialogue and action Vision and innovation
Trustworthiness and popularity Degree and equity of
participation
Access to participation
Extent and level of participation
Information equity Awareness and correct knowledge about the issue or program Enhanced free flow of information
Collective self-efficacy Perceived efficacy to take action as a group Perceived capability of other community members Perceived efficacy to solve problems as a group Sense of ownership Importance of the issue or program to participants
Responsibility for the issue/program Contribution to the program Perceived benefit from the program
Perceived accountability from the program results Perceived personal identification with the program Social cohesion Sense of belonging
Feelings of morale Goal consensus Social trust Social reciprocity Network cohesion
Social norms Norms on participation
Norms about leadership
Norms about specific issue/program
Figueroa et al. (2002) explain that sustained and efficient leadership is fundamental for community participation. Leadership encourages members of the community to voluntary participate in the program, demonstrate leadership vision and share benefits of the program, as
33
well as planning the social change process. Degree and equity of participation measures the range of participation of the community members, of those who related to the problems and of the variety of activities that members got involved. These activities range from planning stages, selecting leaders, making decisions about services and delivery mode, mobilising and managing resources, and eventually evaluating the program outcome (Figueroa et al., 2002).
Information equity measures the level of awareness and shared knowledge regarding an
issue or program, either among individuals within the groups, or between groups within the community. It also measures the degree of access the community has to similar sources of information (Figueroa et al., 2002). Collective self-efficacy refers to the shared belief and confidence that a group of people who join together are capable of taking action and solving problems (Figueroa et al., 2002). Sense of ownership refers to the community’s feeling/belief that the issue and program belong to them (their community), and that they have an engagement with the program (Figueroa et al., 2002).
Social cohesions are the forces that stimulate members of a group or community to stay in
the group and continue their contribution to the group project. In this sense, members feel that they are part of the group, want to maintain a relationship and want to work together towards achieving the group’s goal (Figueroa et al., 2002). Social norms refer to agreed standards and rules that the majority of members of the society or group adhere to. Social norms are people’s beliefs about what kind of attitudes or behaviours are normal, acceptable and expected (Figueroa et al., 2002).
However, the catalyst model is a missing piece in most DC and social change literature, because there is an assumption that dialogue and action naturally take place in the community (Figueroa et al., 2002; Parks et al., 2005).