FOR ME, 2011 and 2012 are going to be memorable as campaign years – last year, we had Guyana’s elections with its unprecedented outcome and this year my eyes are focused on the U.S. Presidential campaign.
The Obama camp scored an important victory last week with the Supreme Court decision to uphold his sweeping health care plan, the most comprehensive overhaul in half a century. The President’s commitment to this plan was in itself more than just a piece of legislation – it was a cause, a campaign in which the opponents were as passionate and as dedicated as the proponents.

We in Guyana have had a number of such ‘campaigns’ of our own, so many that they have become virtually routine. As far back as my memory serves me, at any given time, there has always been a campaign for a cause of some kind, addressing some issue, usually social or public health. These included but have not been limited to such causes as truancy, littering and sanitation issues, elephantiasis, crime prevention, domestic violence, road safety, et cetera.
Often, I get the feeling that some of the campaigns start and stop at their launch – there is often a deafening silence following the media spectacle. At best, we hear of a ‘plan’ to roll out the campaign in question but, arguably, are often given a few public service announcements, newspaper spreads and, sometimes even training sessions for some key stakeholders if they’re lucky.

Very little mention, if any, is ever given to the details we require to initiate the change process and maintain it – projected reach among population; key interventions and their projected impact; how the interventions will be monitored/evaluated; and most importantly, sustained in a society already challenged for human and financial resources. Added to that is the continued need for the coordinators of these ‘campaigns’ to periodically engage the media in their progress and/or results. Perhaps this perceived ‘campaign’ silence on my part is due to the latter as I don’t often see the same fanfare at the conclusion of the campaign  as applied at its launch.
Indeed, the launch of ‘campaigns’ often gives the impression that it is more personality than issue-driven.
We often hear of who was present/spoke at the launch and what commitment they would have made for sustainability of whatever campaign is being undertaken. Again, it is probably  the media reportage of these ‘campaigns’ which gives this impression, but who takes the onus to ensure that these oral commitments are upheld? Oftentimes, these commitments fly on eagles’ wings and never are followed up/enacted. Similarly, it can be argued that ‘campaigns’ are often done to raise personal profiles or agendas and as such, they over-promise and under-deliver. We have seen some examples of this in Guyana so much so that there is often the backlash of bad-press for unpreparedness/lack of equipment and/or access to the service in the campaign. Someone once reported that following a public ‘campaign’ encouraging access to a particular service, they showed up only to be turned away due to non- working/unavailable equipment on the day of their visit.
While some ‘campaigns’ have realised varied amount of success, it can be posited that they are more reactive in nature and often give a false sense of the prevalence of the issue/s. Evidence-based planning is a serious challenge in Guyana and oftentimes one sees a ‘band-wagon’ approach to problem solving, which seemingly emanates from media reports of whatever issue is being addressed. In the case of domestic violence, we often see multiple campaigns being launched almost simultaneously, without much or no coordination among the entities involved.
Suffice to say, following millions of dollars in investment and the ‘silence’ in the ‘campaigns’, the real issues which initiated the campaign, in the first instance, continue to affect the core of the population. Case in point – domestic violence – has always been a worrying situation for many who live in fear of being the next one injured or killed. Arguably, many players have come onboard and attempted to wave a series of ‘campaigns’, however extensive or short-lived, that have realised some effect. However, I often worry about the real results for the investment made.
There has been perhaps one campaign which has run counter to this trend, that of Mothers in Black – the non-governmental organisation – and their relentless commitment to the issues of road safety, a campaign marked by a fair amount of success to the point, particularly in realising the passage of road safety legislation. I’ve written about this organisation before, praising the spirit and strength of its founder, Ms. Denise Dias. I recall Mothers in Black tirelessly advocating, sometimes quietly but no less effectively, their cause, until they have now become more or less a household name in Guyana. This is but one success story of that selfless commitment to stay the course and remain true to the thrust of the campaign; what about the others?
Undoubtedly, campaigns can work for good of national issues especially those which have extreme effects to life and limb. However, one would rather see a more proactive and sustained approach to public campaigns; one informed by some empirical evidence and comprehensive enough to adequately address the issue at hand. Additionally, sustainability and commitment are key to successful campaigns and change thus increased capacity of the coordinators and/or implementers of the campaign to the cause would be recommended.