Social Media for Sustainable Development: Challenging Participatory Development Practices to Re-learn and Realign Stakeholder Practices in Tamale Metropolis, Ghana

Ismail Mohammed; Jonas Kwabla Fiadzawoo

doi:10.19044/esj.2023.v19n14p35

Ismail Mohammed Department of Integrated Development Studies University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana
Jonas Kwabla Fiadzawoo Department of Language and Information Studies University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2023.v19n14p35

Keywords: Social media; citizens participation, sustainable development, SDGs

Abstract

This study aims at finding out how social media has been explored for the enhancement of sustainable development in the Tamale Metropolis. It was based on Uses and Gratification Theory (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch,1974). It adopted a mixed approach and relied on questionnaires and interview guides for collecting data. Local community leaders (N. 25) were interviewed. A hundred questionnaires were also administered with Google Forms. The interview data were analysed qualitatively and the results were presented based on content and themes. The data obtained through the questionnaires were processed and presented descriptively in percentages. Findings showed that social media was highly used among the participants (92%). Those within higher education were 44% while those without higher education numbered 57%. It was found that there was males dominance in local community development support groups. Sixty-one percent of the participants used social media to support sustainable community development. They employed the media to foster citizens’ participation and contribution to sustainable development. The study, therefore, proposed to community groups to have their social media groups registered with the authorities to promote their visibility. The study also called for proper evaluation of citizens' media activities in order to support their contribution to sustainable development, which it argued will strengthen efforts to achieve SDGs 11 and 17.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

PlumX Statistics

References

1. African Union Commission. (2006). African Youth Charter (p. 21). African Union Addis Ababa.
http://tisierraleone.org/African%20Youth%20Charter.pdf.
2. Anderson, J., & Rainie, L. (2018). The Future of Well-Being in a Tech-Saturated World. Pew Research Center.
3. Arnstein, S. (2015). A ladder of citizen participation. In The city reader (pp. 323–336). Routledge.
4. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.
5. Arthur, C. (2012). Encouraging Political Participation in Africa: The potential of Social Media platforms (p. 12) [Situation Report]. Institute for Security Studies.
6. Bailey, R. C., & Lumpkin, G. (2021). Enacting Positive Social Change: A Civic Wealth Creation Stakeholder Engagement Framework. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 10422587211049744.
7. Barker-Vormawor, O. O. (2021). Fixthecountry (@Ghfixthecountry) / Twitter. Twitter. https://twitter.com/Ghfixthecountry.
8. Barnett-Queen, T., Blair, R., & Merrick, M. (2005). Student perspectives of online discussions: Strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 23(3–4), 229–244.
9. Brian, D. (2021). How Many People Use Social Media in 2021? (65+ Statistics). Backlinko. https://backlinko.com/social-media-users.
10. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. London: Oxford university press.
11. Chaffey, D. (2016) Global social media research summary 2016. Smart Insights: Social Media Marketing.
12. Chaffey, D. (2021, March 11). Global social media statistics research summary [updated 2021]. Smart Insights. https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research/.
13. Chang, N. (2006). E-discussions as a complement to traditional instruction: Did the students like online communication and why? Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 27(3), 249–264.
14. Chen, B., & Bryer, T. (2012). Investigating instructional strategies for using social media in formal and informal learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 87–104.
15. Cheung, W. S., Hew, K. F., & Ng, C. S. L. (2008). Toward an understanding of why students contribute in asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(1), 29–50.
16. Creswell, J. W. (2015). A Concise introduction to Mixed Methods Research. London: SAGE publications.
17. Quansah, D. J. Y., Fiadzawoo, J. K., & Kanyir, K. C. (2016a). Students’ Engagement in Social Media and Its Mainstay for Teaching and Learning. The Case of the Wa Nursing Training College. American Journal of Educational Research, 9.
18. Emarketers. (2016). ‘Nearly One-Third of the World Will Use Social Networks Regularly This Year’ [Online]. https://www.emarketer.com/Article/Nearly-One-Third-of-World-Will-Use-Social-Networks-Regularly-This-Year/1014157.
19. Fiadzawoo, J. K., Achanso, A. S. & Okyere, R. B. (2018). Reading in the Digital Age; An Overview of the Habits of Students of the Faculty of Education, UDS, Tamale. Journal of Educational Review (JER), Vol. 10, No 2. (87-102).
20. Gerbaudo, P. (2021). Are digital parties more democratic than traditional parties? Evaluating Podemos and Movimento 5 Stelle’s online decision-making platforms. Party Politics, 27(4), 730–742.
21. Guest, G., & Namey, E. E. (2015). Mixed Methods Research. In Public Health Research Methods. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483398839.
22. Hamzah, A., & Suandi, T. (1994). Factors contributing towards the sustainability of youth organizations as partners in community development. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 2(2), 87–93.
23. Huttunen, S., Ojanen, M., Ott, A., Saarikoski, H. (2022). What about citizens? A literature review of citizen engagement in sustainability transitions research. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS).Vol. 19, 02714.
24. Jason, L. A., & Glenwick, D. S. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of Methodological Approaches to Community-Based Research: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/9780190243654.001.0001.
25. Joseph, J. (2021). Topic: Internet usage worldwide. Statista. https://www.statista.com/topics/1145/internet-usage-worldwide/.
26. Kate, R., William, M., Jacopo, B., Antonia, W., Katerina, G., Sofia, M., & Giacomo, P. P. (2020). Social Media in Africa—A double-edged sword for security and development (p. 91) [Research Report].
27. Kemp, S. (2021). Digital 2021: The latest insights into the ‘state of digital’. We Are Social. https://wearesocial.com/blog/2021/01/digital-2021-the-latest-insights-into-the-state-of-digital
28. Kumi, E. (2019). Advancing the Sustainable Development Goals: An Analysis of the Potential Role of Philanthropy in Ghana. Journal of Asian and African Studies, Vol. 54(7) 1084–1104.
29. Kvasničková Stanislavská, L.; Pilař, L.; Margarisová, K.; Kvasnička, R. (2020). Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Media: Comparison between Developing and Developed Countries.. Sustainable 12, 5255. [Google Scholar].
30. Leavy, P. (2017). Research Design: Quantitative, Qualitative, Mixed Methods, Arts-Based, and Community-Based Participatory Research Approaches. The Guilford Press, New York. London.
31. Mahama, A. (2018). Appraisal of Continues Professional Development of Basic School Teachers in the Nanumba North District [Thesis]. University for Development Studies.
32. Marinotti, J. P. (2017). Symposium on Language, the Sustainable Development Goals, and Vulnerable Populations, New York: Study Group on Language and the United Nations .
33. Marcolin, B., Saunders, C., Aubert, B. (2022). Persuasive Technologies and Social Interactions in Professional Environments: Embedded Qualitative Case Study. JMIR Form Res, 6(2):e32613 doi: 10.2196/32613.
34. McLeod, J. M., Zubric, J., Keum, H., Deshpande, S., Cho, J., Stein, S., & Heather, M. (2001). Reflecting and connecting: Testing a communication mediation model of civic participation. Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington, DC.
35. Michels, A., & De Graaf, L. (2010). Examining Citizen Participation: Local Participatory Policy Making and Democracy. Local Government Studies,36(4),477–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2010.494101.
36. Moore, K. R., & Elliott, T. J. (2016). From participatory design to a listening infrastructure: A case of urban planning and participation. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 30(1), 59–84.
37. Preece, J., Maloney-Krichmar, D., & Abras, C. (2003). History of online communities. Encyclopedia of Community, 3(1023–1027), 86.
38. Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. London: CRC Press.
39. Seltzer, E., & Mahmoudi, D. (2013). Citizen Participation, Open Innovation, and Crowdsourcing: Challenges and Opportunities for Planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 28(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412212469112L
40. Shah, D. V., Cho, J., Eveland, W. P., & Kwak, N. (2005). Information and Expression in a Digital Age: Modeling Internet Effects on Civic Participation. Communication Research, 32(5), 531–565. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650205279209
41. Shayan, N. F., Mohabbati-Kalejahi.N., Alavi, S., Zahad, M. A (2022). Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Sustainability, 14(3), 1222; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031222..
42. Shen, L.-B. (2008). Computer Technology and College Students’ Reading Habits. Chia-Nan Annual Bulletin Vol. 32, 559－572, 14.
43. Simonsen, J., & Robertson, T. (2012). Routledge international handbook of participatory design. London: Routledge.
44. Stein, S. M., & Harper, T. L. (2003). Power, trust, and planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 23(2), 125–139.
45. Stein, S., & Harper, T. (2000). The paradox of planning in a multicultural liberal society: A pragmatic reconciliation. Urban Planning in a Multicultural Society, 67–82.
46. Tirmizi, S. N. A. (2005). The contribution of levels of social capital to community development. Iowa State University.
47. Tsao, R., Preece, J., & Lazar, J. (1999). One Foot in Cyberspace & the Other on the Ground A Case Study of Analysis and Design Issues in a Hybrid Virtual and Physical Community. WebNet Journal: Internet Technologies, Applications & Issues, 1(3), 49–57.
48. Vonderwell, S., & Zachariah, S. (2005). Factors that influence participation in online learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(2), 213–230.
49. Wilkinson, C. R., & De Angeli, A. (2014). Applying user centred and participatory design approaches to commercial product development. Design Studies, 35(6), 614–631.
50. Wojcieszak, M. E., & Mutz, D. C. (2009). Online groups and political discourse: Do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement? Journal of Communication, 59(1), 40–56.
51. Yunus, M., Nordin, N., Salehi, H., Amin Embi, M., & Salehi, Z. (2013). The Use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Teaching ESL Writing Skills. English Language Teaching, 6(7), p1. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n7p1.