[cr-india] May 2004 meeting in Delhi: Recommendations

[Frederick Noronha (FN)]

Executive Summary of Recommendations 

Workshop on 'Designing an Enabling Framework for Community Radio in India'

1.Eligibility

It was recommended that eligibility of applicants for community radio and allotment of licenses can be modeled on tried-and-proven practices of other countries, eg., ABA, the Radio Authority of UK etc. A case was made for addressing the eligibility issue in the licensing procedure rather than in the policy framework. A basic requirement for receiving a license is that the licensee must demonstrate a proven track record of work in the community it claims to represent. Due weightage should be given to the standing, commitment, objectives and resources of the applicant organization, and an important criterion for the allotment of a CR license should be the quality and comprehensiveness of the proposal submitted by the applicant.

Eligibility criteria should not be overtly exclusive, and rather than attempting to define eligibility, it may be more logical to define who is not eligible for a CR license. For instance, religious and political entities should not be permitted to hold CR licenses. The licensee should preferably be a registered entity, though this should not be a precondition. They may be required to register themselves within a suitable time-frame. The possibility of holding 'public hearings' prior to sanctioning licenses, as in countries like South Africa, could also be looked into.

The issue of offering licenses to intermediaries like NGOs was addressed. It was pointed out that it would be difficult for an amorphous entity like a community to apply for a radio station in India, and intermediaries - like NGOs - necessarily had to be involved. However, Community Radio was not necessarily NGO Radio, and hence the need to widen the range of eligible entities.

An indicative list of groups that could apply for a Community Radio license would be:  Gram-Sabhas and recognised community cooperatives, local self-help groups, NGOs and voluntary organizations, local schools and educational institutions.

Three aspects of eligibility would be (a) the validity of the claim that the applicant represents a local community (b) the length of time during which the entity has been actively working in the region and (c) the applicant's proven track record of community development work in the area of the license. 

The question of issuing CR licenses to Panchayats and other local bodies was also discussed, but it was felt that this would be counter-productive. One of the functions of Community Radio is to assess and report on the achievements and failures of the local administration, and a community radio station owned by a Panchayat would not be able to perform this function in an impartial manner.

2.Representative Body

It is recommended that an Association of community broadcasters, like CBAA (Community Broadcasters Association of Australia) or NCRF (South Africa) should be set up in India to support community radio initiatives in various ways. While the composition of the body was not discussed, it was stressed that the representative body would act as a conduit for seed funding and assistance, mutual cooperation, content sharing, capacity building, liaising with Central departments etc. It would act as an interface between the government and community radio applicants / licensees, since small communities with limited resources may not be able to deal routinely with central government departments.

The proposed national body representing CR would also be a forum to address issues of self-regulation. It would ensure codes of conduct / practices, facilitate public hearings in the community and act as mediator between the regulator and the community station. It would also form the first court of appeal by communities if they have a complaint against their local CR station. 

3.License Fee & Spectrum Usage Fee

It is obvious that small and marginalized communities, especially in the rural sector, cannot afford the kind of license fees levied on commercial stations. Since community stations are not-for-profit, and are run for developmental rather than commercial purposes, a high license fee would be anomalous. Spectrum Usage Fee would be another significant non-programming recurring expense for CR stations. For instance, it was stated that Anna FM pays an annual SUF of Rs.19,500, an amount which would be a severe drain on the resources of any self-supporting community station. 

It was therefore recommended that license fee and spectrum usage fee for community radio should to be kept at affordable levels.

4.Regulations and Monitoring

Some form of non-intrusive supervision by an autonomous regulator would be preferable to overt regulation.

International experience suggests that there are several ways to prevent the misuse of community radio stations. The community radio experience in Australia indicates that monitoring is done on a voluntary basis by the public, and that the government does not have be a monitoring agency. Since broadcasting is a public activity, people tend to complain if they find anything wrong. It could be made compulsory for every CR station to advertise - on air - that if the public has any objections to its programming, they should make an immediate complaint.

CR stations could also be required to preserve recorded tapes of their programmes for, say, three months. The deployment of its revenues by the CR station should also be monitored, and its books audited once a year. It was recommended that public hearings should be organized, where the licensee has to state the mission of his CR station. Programme monitoring would then be taken up by the community. 

5.Licensing Process

A simplified licensing process needs to be set in place for community radio. It was noted that the present process of seeking clearances from at least 6 ministries and departments was cumbersome and time consuming. Remote and rural communities, in particular, would not have the resources or time necessary to liaise on a continuous basis with central ministries and departments. In the interest of expediting the process, it was recommended that there should a single window clearance system, and that the procedure should be time bound. 

It is understood that a clear time-frame has been proposed for frequency allocation and SACFA clearance, but time limits also need to be set for obtaining other clearances - including security clearance. This could be achieved by initiating dialogue with the concerned Ministries and Departments. 

6.Commercials / Sponsorships

It was recommended that, to ensure sustainability, limited on-air commercial activity - including advertisements and sponsorship announcements - should be permitted on Community Radio. This should be subject to the condition that community stations may only broadcast advertisements / sponsorship messages which relate to businesses, services, work opportunities and events that are relevant and limited to the specified area. Community stations should also ensure that the sponsors of programmes do not influence either the content or style of individual programmes, nor the overall programming of the community station.

Limited advertising on community radio channels is permitted in many countries. Australia allows five minutes of commercials in every hour of programming, while in South Africa, the limit is four minutes per hour. As a means of financial sustainability, the government should permit a mix of government and non-government sponsorship and limited advertising on CR, with emphasis on local services and products. Checks and balances would have to be built into policy to ensure that community radio stations are not over-commercialised.

The Commercial Code of All India Radio would apply to the community broadcaster.

7.Funding

Community radio should be allowed to access funds from all legal sources. However, safeguards should be built in to ensure that funding agencies do not influence programming. It was agreed that restrictions on funding could be a serious constraint, especially for poorer communities that cannot afford the initial high cost of setting up a CR station. Funds can be legitimately accessed through many channels, and such seed funds would be vital to establish and sustain a community station, for the creation of infrastructure, capacity building, research & development of innovative programming etc.

Community Stations should be permitted, either directly or through their representative body, to solicit grants, donations, and other monetary contributions from Government, the private sector, institutions, groups and individuals, and also from foreign donors after taking necessary clearances. 

8.Technical Parameters

Technical parameters such as transmitter power and area of coverage for Community Radio stations have to be different from those in place for campus radio. Coverage area for community radio stations must be consistent with the geographical area in which the community being served is located, and consequently, a range of transmitter power may be required depending on the coverage area and terrain. The permitted transmitter power and tower height should be decided on the basis of the area of work of the licensee and/or the geographic dispersal of listeners. 

Data-casting is an important developmental tool, and would be invaluable for information-deprived communities. Data-casting, therefore, should be permitted on community radio. 

Community radio applicants should be able to apply for frequency allocation and SACFA clearance simultaneously, and the procedures for technical clearances should be simplified and time-bound.

While the frequencies of 90.4, 90.8 and 91.2 MHz have been set aside for community radio, 91 MHz has been given to commercial FM operators in certain cities, where it would potentially interfere with community radio frequencies. This frequency should either be blocked, or alternative frequencies should be made available for CR. 

The release of additional frequencies for CR should also be explored. Where there is limited spectrum availability or limited resources and capacities of an individual applicant, frequency sharing by more than one applicant may be permitted. 

9.Codes of Conduct

It was recommended that a Code of Practice should be evolved for community radio which enshrines agreed standards among community broadcasters. The Code would guide all areas of CR activity, including station management and programming. The Code of Practice would be a document of self-regulation that would not only facilitate good programming practices and editorial independence, it would also act as a shield from interference by vested interests.

10.Accountability Parameters

It was recommended that accountability parameters should be built into the management structure of CR, its implementing structure, and content creation. At all these levels, participation by the community, the station management and the advisory body has to be ensured. To ensure accountability, and to facilitate good programming practices and editorial independence, it was also recommended that the representative body should implement codes of conduct, and facilitate regular public hearings in the community. 

To address and pre-empt regulatory and security concerns, it was proposed to have a trial period or short term license for CR applicants. The trial period would also allow for examination of related issues such as who represents the community, the degree of community participation achieved, the sustainability of the station etc.

* * *