1. 1
Adrian Baillie-Stewart
Keywords: communication strategy, fight against drugs, drugs in society,
participatory communication paradigm, high-level strategic proposal,
development challenge drugs, hybridised format.
Abstract: This communication strategy adopts its purpose and intent from
conclusions derived in the prior completed research paper, Campaign
Comparisons: Why TB Health Trumps the Fight Against Drugs on South
Africa’s Development Agenda (Baillie-Stewart, 2015). The South African
Government’s prior efforts to battle the prevalence of drugs, have proved
to be unsuccessful. This was attributed to the absence of an integrated and
co-ordinated communications (core) function that overarched the
combined efforts of the various South African Government departments,
civil society institutions and non-profit organisations. The reintroduced
Fight Against Drugs communication strategy is firmly situated within a
participatory communication paradigm. The Fight Against Drugs
communication strategy is a high-level strategic proposal that employs a
hybridised format of recommended international best-practices that
adequately address the complex Fight Against Drugs development
challenge South Africa. The Fight Against Drugs communication strategy
successfully reintroduces a revised set of objectives and criteria to
adequately support the ongoing Fight Against Drugs which ought to be
promoted to a top priority on the South African development agenda.
Author
Information:
Director/founder — Content Strategics (Pty) Ltd.
Media and communications consultant, social media and online content
manager, media researcher, retired photographer and photojournalist.
Part-time (mid-career) postgraduate student (MA Journalism) at
Stellenbosch University, South Africa.

2. 2
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
............................................................................................................................................................
2
INTRODUCTION
..................................................................................................................................................
3
DEVELOPMENT
—
DEFINITION
AND
PARADIGM
....................................................................................
3
DEVELOPMENT
DEFINITION
.................................................................................................................................................
3
DEVELOPMENT
PARADIGM
...................................................................................................................................................
4
REINTRODUCING
THE
FIGHT
AGAINST
DRUGS
—
A
COMMUNICATION
STRATEGY
.....................
4
THE
FIGHT
AGAINST
DRUGS
IS
BY
NO
MEANS
WON
......................................................................................................
4
COMMUNICATION
STRATEGY
—
A
PROPOSED
SOLUTION
TO
A
“BUNDLE
OF
PROBLEMS”
......................................
6
REINTRODUCING
THE
FIGHT
AGAINST
DRUGS
COMMUNICATION
STRATEGY
—
SETTING
OUT
THE
STRATEGIC
CRITERIA
...................................................................................................................
7
NATURE
OF
THE
DEVELOPMENT
CHALLENGE
.................................................................................................................
7
REINTRODUCING
NEW
OBJECTIVES
AND
CRITERIA
..............................................................................
8
GET
EVERYBODY
ROUND
THE
TABLE
—
KEY
STAKEHOLDERS
MEET
.........................................................................
8
THE
GOLDEN
THREAD
WOVEN
THROUGH
EVERYTHING
—
COMMUNICATION
STAKEHOLDER/S
.........................
8
PROPOSED
BROADER
STAKEHOLDER-­‐NUCLEUS
...............................................................................................................
9
ROLES
OF
BROADER
STAKEHOLDER-­‐NUCLEUS
..............................................................................................................
10
GEOGRAPHIC
AND
DEMOGRAPHIC
FOCUS
.......................................................................................................................
10
KEY
MESSAGES
.....................................................................................................................................................................
11
KEY
TARGET
AUDIENCES
...................................................................................................................................................
12
DATA
GATHERING
FRAMEWORK
—
RESULTS-­‐BASED
MANAGEMENT
......................................................................
12
FUNDING
BUDGET
...............................................................................................................................................................
13
MONITORING
AND
EVALUATION
—
CRITERIA
...............................................................................................................
14
TIMELINE
..........................................................................................................................................................
15
CONCLUSION
....................................................................................................................................................
16
ENDNOTES
........................................................................................................................................................
17
REFERENCES
.....................................................................................................................................................
18

3. 3
INTRODUCTION
As a natural progression, this paper adopts its purpose and intent from conclusions derived in
the research paper, Campaign Comparisons: Why TB Health Trumps the Fight Against Drugs
on South Africa’s Development Agenda (Baillie-Stewart, 2015). Contained within that paper’s
research findings, the following conclusion is articulated (Baillie-Stewart 2015, p. 12, emphasis
mine):
… Although the TB Health campaign is a lot stronger than the Building a Drug Free Society
campaign, both campaigns nevertheless do suggest many shortcomings in the strategic
communications approach that was adopted by each. Next time around, with a decidedly more
holistic approach to be taken—and stronger compliance in accordance with advocated
theoretical methods for strategic communications to be taken—improvement in
communications strategies for both campaigns is possible.
Consequently, for this paper, the author has chosen to focus on the design and presentation of a
communication strategy that will address the primary challenges that were evident in the
weaker of the two development objectives exposed in the former cited research — namely,
that of the Building a Drug Free Society campaign.
The communication strategy will include relevant key-components that would also be
commonly found in more generic-type project proposals.
Next, the author will provide a necessary, but succinct (contextually relevant) series of
definitions of Development, as well as provide a short motivation for specifically situating the
communication strategy within a Participatory Communication development paradigm.
DEVELOPMENT
—
DEFINITION
AND
PARADIGM
DEVELOPMENT
DEFINITION
Drawing upon same previous research article that is being discussed, Melkote and Steeves
(Baillie-Stewart, 2013, p. 4) define Development as the generally understood “process by
which societal conditions are improved”. Friberg and Hettne (Baillie-Stewart, 2013) however,
are of the resolute view that “there is no universal path to development … [and therefore] each
society must find its own [workable] strategy”. But, because of the vast scope and multi-faceted
dimensions to development, authors Todaro and Smith (Baillie-Stewart, 2013) believe that
“development should ... be perceived as a multidimensional process involving the

4. 4
reorganization and reorientation of entire economic and social systems”, …which may even
necessitate the need to (possibly) alter “institutional, social, and administrative structures”
(Baillie-Stewart, 2013).
In summary, the definition this communication strategy adopts, integrates a synthesis of the
preceding definitions.
DEVELOPMENT
PARADIGM
In the same research, Baillie-Stewart’s (2013, p. 9) exploration of participatory communication
as a preferred paradigm (or theoretical framework) for Southern-African and African contexts,
concludes with this declaration:
… [The] participatory communication approach … [feasibly] remains the best development
communication option for use in contemporary Southern Africa and South Africa. It is thus the
… preferred choice for ongoing use and applicability in many contemporary development
communication contexts and … would positively contribute towards the development process.
Consequently, this communication strategy—that supports the identified development
objective—is firmly situated within a participatory communication paradigm.
The following section introduces the necessary context which forms the basis for South
Africa’s ongoing battle against drugs, …as it presents itself on the macro level of the South
African development agenda. The ensuing sub-section presents the reader with a requisite
discussion, supporting significant reasons for adopting this communications strategy’s
hybridised format, that has—in the author’s examined view—been purposefully crafted in
order to adequately address the complex Fight Against Drugs development challenge that
South Africa is obliged to continue with.
REINTRODUCING
THE
FIGHT
AGAINST
DRUGS
—
A
COMMUNICATION
STRATEGY
THE
FIGHT
AGAINST
DRUGS
IS
BY
NO
MEANS
WON
As recently as Saturday, 10 October 2015, at Eldorado Parki
, Soweto, leader of the Democratic
Alliance (DA), Mmusi Maimane, launched several criticisms at South Africa’s Government,
led by President Jacob Zuma (Wakefield, 2015). Maimane was reported to have said that
[development] “programmes fail” because “promises are broken the moment they’re made”

5. 5
(Wakefield, 2015). Alluding to social development efforts being made in South Africa’s
Western Province, Maimane stated that although a vast amount of money is spent on
“prevention and rehabilitation programmes, the fight against drugs must have a wider focus
than just law enforcement and rehabilitation” (Wakefield, 2015).
Maimane’s assertions by no means suggest that the South African Government does not take an
earnest regard for the social importance of implementing specific interventions by its
government departments, as part of its ongoing effort to manage the pervasiveness of drugs in
South African society.
In addition, a significant contextual fact is this: the South African Government’s National Drug
Master Plan (NDMP) was formulated by,
the Central Drug Authority in terms of the Prevention and Treatment of Drug Dependency Act
(20 of 1992), as amended, as well as the Prevention of and Treatment for Substance Abuse Act
(70 of 2008), as amended, and approved by Parliament to meet the requirements of the
international bodies concerned and at the same time the specific needs of South African
communities, which sometimes differ from those of other countries (National Drug Master
Plan [NDMP]: 2013 - 2017 2013, p. 4).
On its official website, the South African Central Drug Authority (CDA), lists the various
departments that have been charged with the “drawing up [of] operational plans referred to as
‘mini-drug master plans’ (MDMPs) in line with [the] core functions” of those specific
departments (CDA: Interventions by Government Departments, 2015).
However, it is apparent that one of primary reasons the Government’s efforts to battle the
prevalence of drugs may be failing, is the apparent absence of an integrated and co-ordinated
communications (core) function that is shared between the various government departments.
The CDA’s official website (CDA: Interventions by Government Departments, 2015) lists
numerous departments and/or authoritiesii
that have been charged with accountability for
delivering their departmental MDMPs. But interestingly, the Government Communication and
Information System (GCIS), which falls under the Ministry of Communications, is not listed as
one of the key departments that ought to be fulfilling its very own unique set of core
communications functions in the ongoing fight against drugs. The fact that this possible
oversight has occurred, is possible case study proof of the United Nations Development

6. 6
Programme’s (UNDP) assertions that, governments, when formulating policies that address
development challenges, often regard the communications component thereof as a “secondary
activity” that is more often than not, “tacked on as an afterthought (UNDP Developing a
Communications Strategy, 2014, para. 1).
This communication strategy may well serve to inspire the CDA to consider making necessary
amendments to its National Drug Master Plan (NDMP). This potentially intricate process could
be hastened by appointing the SA Government’s Communication and Information System (i.e.
GCIS)—via a parliamentary proclamation motioned by the Ministry of Communications—to
take ownership and thus fulfil a primary role in the adoption and inclusion of this
communication strategy (and hence, fulfil its necessary specialist-role within the broader
NDMP too).
As alluded to in the Introduction, the following sub-section outlines the recommended
hybridised format that has been purposefully crafted in order to adequately address the complex
Fight Against Drugs development challenge that South Africa is obliged to continue with.
COMMUNICATION
STRATEGY
—
A
PROPOSED
SOLUTION
TO
A
“BUNDLE
OF
PROBLEMS”
This paper makes use of a hybridised format (i.e. using a combination) of prescribed
international best-practice formats for communications strategies — one which is in use by the
UK Government Service (Writing a Communication Strategy, 2014) and the other in use by the
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (Tweneboa-Kodua et al., 2008).
The reason for the adoption of a combination of international best-practice communications
strategy formats per se, stems from the NDMP’s intent to implement policy that also takes
cognisance of international best-practices by “[meeting] the requirements of the international
bodies concerned” (National Drug Master Plan [NDMP]: 2013 - 2017, 2013, p. 4)
Thus, preliminary planning and research during the drafting stages of this communications
strategy, involved the adoption of some UNICEF best practices. In particular, one of these best
practices involves the need to include a dedicated participatory communications element in the
strategy. This is of primary importance for a developing country; which, according to the
International Statistical Institute, South Africa is classified as (The International Statistical
Institute (ISI) 2015).

7. 7
The UK Government Service states that a communications strategy addresses a solution to a
“bundle of problems”, expressed in a “single, coherent narrative” (Writing a Communication
Strategy, 2014, p. 3).
An important distinction to be made is that “strategy differs from a plan in that it:
• considers the wider context,
• [it] tends to take a longer-term view,
• [and it] avoids the detail of individual activities” (Writing a Communication
Strategy, 2014, p. 3).
To encapsulate further clarity surrounding the purpose of this communication strategy, further
insight is gained from Mefalopulos and Kamlongera (Mefalopulos, 2008, p. 111):
… [A] strategy is about achieving specific, feasible, and clearly stated objectives,
with the available resources, within an established timeline. Similarly, a communication
strategy can be defined as a well-planned series of actions aimed at achieving specific
objectives through the use of communication methods, techniques, and approaches.
With the preceding framework and set of motivations now firmly embedded within the text of
this communication strategy, let us proceed to outline the definitive criteria constituting the
kernel of the communication strategy.
REINTRODUCING
THE
FIGHT
AGAINST
DRUGS
—
SETTING
OUT
THE
STRATEGIC
CRITERIAiii
NATURE
OF
THE
DEVELOPMENT
CHALLENGEiv
The nature of this particular development challenge, is such that past efforts to successfully and
efficiently drive a communication campaign to support a countrywide ‘fight against drugs’ has
largely been unsuccessful. Conducting a cursory scan of online news media reports quickly
suggests that the battle to reduce the pervasiveness of drugs in South Africa may seemingly be
a lost cause. However, this need not be the case at all.
Thus, in an positive bid to revive these efforts, there is no option but for South Africa—with its
National, Provincial and Local government departments, and many other stakeholders from

8. 8
civil society, corporate business and the broader community at large—to continue to advance
the long-term battle against the burgeoning drug problem in South Africa. The Fight Against
Drugs, second only to HIV/Aids and Corruption perhaps, ought to be one of the country’s top-
priority development challenges.
But, without sufficient allocation of numerous and varied resources, to accompany such a top-
priority development challenge—coupled with the political will to win this battle—the Fight
Against Drugs will remain a losing battle.
Next we look at what the primary new objectives and criteria of this reintroduced
communication strategy will be.
REINTRODUCING
NEW
OBJECTIVES
AND
CRITERIA
At a macro level, considering this is indeed a strategy document, it is best—at this stage of such
a high-level document at first—to formulate a single and coherent narrative that (for now), only
considers the wider context, taking the longest-term view into account, and which certainly
does avoid the “detail of individual activities” (Writing a Communication Strategy, 2014, p. 3).
GET
EVERYBODY
AROUND
THE
TABLE
—
KEY
STAKEHOLDERS
MEET
The South African Government, in collaboration with one or two of its primary international
alliances, would need to act as the initial hosts (and primary driver) of the first caucus of all
participating key stakeholders. The view taken in this strategic communication (proposal), is
that participation is primary and thus key to soliciting the committed interest of all parties who
will form the eventual stakeholder-nucleus that will collectively own the Fight Against Drugs
communication campaign.
THE
GOLDEN
THREAD
WOVEN
THROUGH
EVERYTHING
—
COMMUNICATION
STAKEHOLDER/S
The importance of the communications (core) function—as alluded to earlier in this strategy
document—cannot be overemphasised. This communication strategy takes the firm view that,
the participatory communication paradigm underpinning the Fight Against Drugs development
challenge, calls for a well resourced and authoritative entity to broker the initial stakeholder
dialogue. The central objective thus, would be to gain the full involvement of the suitably well
resourced and authoritative South African GCIS, …plus, several other communications
specialists and entities from a broad socio-political spectrum.

9. 9
To do this, it is recommended that, at the most senior (authoritative) political level, an ANC-
initiated Parliamentary motion (Glossary - Parliament of South Africa 2015) must be proposed
by the Ministry of Communications members of Parliament, Minister Faith Muthambi and/or
Deputy Minister Stella Ndabeni-Abrahamsv
. Support for this high priority (development)
communication strategy needs to come from the ‘very top’. Ultimately, proactively confronting
the fight against drugs development challenge will require the unequivocal democratic support
of senior politicians who represent the voting electorate — i.e. the citizens of South Africa.
Once the involvement of the GCIS is secured and ratified in Parliament, …in partnership with a
select-group of ancillary communications stakeholders, the inception and inauguration of a
central Communication Coordination Group (Tweneboa-Kodua et al. 2008, p. 10) will
naturally follow. Once constituted, this Communication Coordination Group (CCG) will drive
all communication-related strategies and operations for the full lifecycle of the Fight Against
Drugs campaign/s.
PROPOSED
BROADER
STAKEHOLDER-­‐NUCLEUS
Lienert (2010) upholds that participatory methods involving planning [and communication]
must include involvement of the stakeholders who will be participating in a particular
[development related] project. Obtaining stakeholders’ “broad consensus on planned
initiatives”, whilst also leveraging the benefit of their combined reservoir of knowledge in
order to “find workable, efficient and sustainable solutions” (Lienert 2010, para. 1), is a
decided benefit of establishing a healthy stakeholder-nucleus (i.e. stakeholder caucus).
The following list comprises the proposed stakeholder-nucleus for the Fight Against Drugs:
o INTERNATIONAL,
GOVERNMENT
AND
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT
STAKEHOLDERS
South African Police Services
All South African Provincial Government Departments
Western Cape Department of Community Safety
Central Drug Authority (CDA)
Interpol: Drug Trafficking Office
United Nations (UN) Office on Drugs and Crime
European Commission (EU) Department International Cooperation on Drug Control
o COMMERCIAL
&
INSTITUTIONAL
STAKEHOLDERS
[Communication] Telkom (South Africa)

10. 10
[Communication] Vodacom (South Africa)
[Communication] MTN (South Africa)
[Communication] South African Broadcasting Corporation (South Africa)
[Communication] NASPERS (South Africa)
[Communication] MultiChoice (South Africa)
Pick ‘n Pay (South Africa)
Foundation for a Drug Free World (International)
Full list of stakeholders yet to be finalised — additional commercial and institutional
stakeholders to account for a total of 15 South African and 3 International entities.
o DEVELOPMENT
STAKEHOLDERS
Anti Drug Alliance South Africa
South African National Council on Alcoholism & Drug Dependence (SANCA)
National Development Agency (NDA)
NB — The Southern African Development Community (SADC): only certain
member states bordering on South Africa’s geographic boundaries; namely,
Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland and Zimbabwe.
ROLES
OF
BROADER
STAKEHOLDER-­‐NUCLEUS
From the strategic perspective of this document, it is best to avoid “the detail of individual
activities” (Writing a Communication Strategy 2014, p. 3) as well as to prescribe the details of
the assortment of roles to be assumed by the many stakeholders. Thus, yet again, the
participatory communication element underpinning this strategy necessitates that details
pertinent to stakeholder roles with follow at a later phase during the design of the operational
plan that will formulated in workshops at the Fight Against Drugs Indaba (see Timeline).
GEOGRAPHIC
AND
DEMOGRAPHIC
FOCUS
The Fight Against Drugs is a countrywide, National development challenge. Accordingly, this
communication strategy’s reach extends to South Africa’s full population demographic,
covering all borders of South Africa. Further afield—internationally—communication will also
go out to all South African diaspora; those temporarily living abroad, expatriates and travellers.
To offer some sort of comparison, as to the magnitude and scale of the the Fight Against Drugs
communication campaign, would be to compare it to a South African Provincial or National
election campaign.

11. 11
KEY
MESSAGES
Owing to the strong participatory communication element factored into this communication
strategy, much of the actual ‘content’ surrounding the key messages will be determined later.
Importantly, stakeholder engagement and participation with the various communities and the
broader public at large, will take full regard of the critical importance to reach the full national
demographic when disseminating messages.
Primarily however, the suggested framework to guide the stakeholder teams that will be
designing content for all messages, are advised to use the following message-determination
criteria adapted from the (UNDG Change Management Toolkit, 2008):
• The key messages … must be conveyed throughout the duration of all
campaigns and mini-campaigns.
• Enforce that this campaign is a reintroduction of something that previously
failed, but that the battle (against drugs) is by no means over! The People of
South Africa & its leadership and all communities and organisation of many
kinds, will carry on with the Fight Against Drugs!
• Messages must not be prescribed or enforced. Rather, processes and requisite
“know-how” (pg.3) will be given to those who will be designing content for all
messages. Members of the stakeholder-nucleus and the Communication
Coordination Group (CCG) must always endeavour to avoid telling various
parties “what to say”. Participation in the communication process warrants this
democratic, participative approach.
Additionally, the content for all campaign messages needs to be crafted in such a way that the
broadest spectrum of views that emanated from the participatory process with stakeholders and
communities, must be factored into the message dissemination process. This emphasises the
need to two-way reciprocal communication to be encouraged, for this campaign. We do not
wish to return to a development paradigm that resembles the former “top down approach”
(Baillie-Stewart, 2013) which was so characteristic of development initiatives in the era prior to
the evolution of the participatory communication paradigm.
During the development of message content and medium, it is imperative that the message is
linked to clearly identifiable goals and objectives (UNDG Change Management Toolkit, 2008)
of the Fight Against Drugs development challenge. Further to this, the following message

12. 12
criteria is important: convey the urgency and magnitude of the initiative; the message must be
memorable; and, designers of the message/s need to ensure that the audience is willing to
accept (and process) [the] message (ibid.).
Lastly, the following control criteria for all messages is strongly suggested when each instance
of a particular message is being drafted, and eventually disseminated thereafter: clarity,
consistency, main points, tone and appeal, credibility, public need (ibid.).
KEY
TARGET
AUDIENCES
Participatory communication principles dictate that —
• Stakeholders and communication specialists will determine and define the key target
audiences during a special workshop session at the Fight Against Drugs Indaba (see
Timeline).
The primary audience segments will be classified in the following categories (ibid.):
• Internal Audiences
• External Audiences
DATA
GATHERING
FRAMEWORK
—
RESULTS-­‐BASED
MANAGEMENT
This communication strategy prioritises the importance of good data. Consequently, “results-
based management is a key tool for development effectiveness” (Roberts and Khattri, 2012, p.
5). For this reason, the gathering of data (of various types) throughout the full extent of the
development cycle, is mandatory. This ensures that a quantifiable “evidence-based approach”
for ongoing monitoring and evaluation, is purposefully embedded within the strategic
framework, thereby facilitating an accurate appraisal of the strategic objectives (ibid.).
This strategy prescribes an engaged involvement by all of the stakeholders, in the routine,
reliable and regular gathering of data — particularly those from the stakeholder-nucleus.
During the Fight Against Drugs Indaba, the Communications Coordination Group (CCG) will
facilitate the necessary workshops and training; the outcome of which, will lead to the drafting
of a comprehensive document, entitled Fight Against Drugs: Result-based Management User
Guide. The User Guide will include an extensive outline of the data framework, processes to be
used for gathering the data, how to monitor the data for suitability, plus further guidelines on
how to measure and monitor problem data, timeframes, scope and the intended outcomes of
employing the Result-based Management Approach to all programme-generated data.

13. 13
FINANCES
–
FUNDING
BUDGET
Considering the size of this development challenge, together with the size of the
communication campaign needed to support it, the “case for [sufficient] funds should reflect
the mission of granting institution[s]” (Zonn and Sokout 2008, p. 2). In this case, stakeholder
involvement and engagement is pivotal to successful financial management and fundraising for
the campaign. The thoughtful recommendation offered in this communication strategy, is that
the initial “seed funds” (Seed Capital Definition | Investopedia 2015) be provided by the South
African taxpayer — no doubt, via a budget allocation from the South African Government.
The actuary-approved seed capital amount/figure, necessary to kick start the programme, is:
US$2 million (ZAR26 million, at prevailing exchange rate)
It is projected that the SA Government’s contribution will amount to an estimated at 25% of the
total project cost for the full Fight Against Drugs communication campaign.
The remaining 75% of the funding, which is calculate to be:
US$6 million (ZAR78.5 million),
will be sourced from a variety of local and international funders, philanthropists and
government bodies — including possible funds to come from the stakeholder-nucleus itself.
The total actuary-estimated budget requirement for the Fight Against Drugs project, is
projected to be in the region of:
US$8 million — ZAR105 million.
NOTE: — The audited actuarial breakdown of these figures, including the accompanying
detailed budget breakdown, will be supplied to all participating members from the final group
of members that constitutes the stakeholder-nucleus, as well as the Communications
Coordination Group (CCG).

14. 14
MONITORING
AND
EVALUATION
—
CRITERIA
Stakeholders and communication specialists will determine the monitoring and evaluation
criteria during a special sitting at the Fight Against Drugs Indaba (to be hosted at the
International Cape Town Convention Centre).

15. 15
4
YEAR
TIMELINE
:
3
YEAR
CAMPAIGN
PLUS
1
YEAR
POST-­‐MORTEM
Activity Time
Allocated
Dates
Strategy Preparation (with first proposal of communication
strategy) — this communication strategy document
Completed By end: October 2015
1st
‘high-level’ meeting to present this strategic planning proposal
(this communication strategy document) to Communications
Ministry of the SA Government.
2 months Anytime during:
November / December
2015
Milestone : agreement to proceed — reached 2 months By end:
November / December
2015
Strategy 1st
Revision (prepare first official revision of original
strategic communication document)
1 month By end:
December 2015
Communications Ministry to propose motion in Parliament 2 months January / February 2016
Milestone: motion passed and accepted in Parliament —
democratic agreement to proceed and to allocate initial ZAR
26 million from the National Treasury Ministry
End February financial
year 2016
Get Everybody Around the Table 6 months By end: June 2016
Key Milestone: Stakeholder-nucleus team finalised 1 month By end: July 2016
Strategy 2nd
Revision (prepare second official revision of 1st
official revision of strategic communication document)
1 month By end: August 2016
Key Milestone: Fight Against Drugs INDABA 1 month By end:
September 2016
Prepare comprehensive operations (project) plan — to include all
participatory communication feedback, budgets, and further
research
2 months By end:
November 2016
Strategy FINAL Revision (prepare FINAL official revision of 2nd
official revision of strategic communication document)
1 month By end:
November 2016
FINAL CONVERSION of Communication Strategy to
DETAILED OPERATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
2 months By end:
December 2016
GO LIVE — Fight Against Drugs 2 years By end:
December 2018
Monitoring and Evaluation — reporting, research and ongoing
results-based management
2 years
(intermittent and
various intervals)
By end:
December 2018
Key Milestone: Fight Against Drugs CAMPAIGN ENDS By end:
December 2018
Post-mortem follow-up and ongoing monitoring and evaluation
— reporting, research and ongoing results-based management
1 year By end:
December 2019

16. 16
CONCLUSION
Previous research conducted by the proposer (and author) of this communication strategy
asserted that one of primary reasons that the Government’s prior efforts to battle the prevalence
of drugs was unsuccessful, was the decided absence of an integrated and co-ordinated
communications (core) function that overarched the combined efforts of the various
Government departments, civil society institutions and non-profit organisations. Consequently
the broader development challenge to reduce the prevalence of drugs in South Africa was
seemingly a lost cause.
However, South Africa—with it’s Government taking the lead—is compelled to carry on with
the battle by not giving up on this complex development challenge. The Fight Against Drugs
communication strategy seeks to successfully reintroduce a revised set of objectives and criteria
that will successfully address the former unsuccessful Building a Drug Free Society campaign
(that was initiated and owned by the South African Government). In effect, the Fight Against
Drugs communication strategy is a well-considered effort to successfully relaunch a robust
communication campaign that will adequately support the Fight Against Drugs development
challenge, which ought to be promoted to a top priority item on South Africa’s development
agenda.
——— End ———

17. 17
ENDNOTES
i
Point of note — comment: Eldorado Park also happens to be the focal point (i.e. exact geographic
location) that the National Drug Master Plan refers to in its foreword by the Minister of Social
Development: quote, “The Government further displayed its commitment through the leadership of the
President when intervening in the challenges faced by the community of Eldorado Park” (National Drug
ii
The total of 17 departments and/or authorities, comprise: Dept. Arts and Culture, Dept. Correctional
Services, Dept. Education, the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC), Dept. Foreign Affairs, Dept. Health,
Dept. Home Affairs, Dept. Justice and Constitutional Development, Dept. Labour, Medicines Control
Council, the National Youth Commission, Dept. Safety and Security, Dept. Social Development, the
South African Police Service (SAPS), and lastly, the Dept. Trade and Industry.
iii
Based on best practice criteria recommended in (Writing a Communication Strategy, 2014, p. 3)
iv
The phrase, development “challenge” is preferred to that of development “problem”, which is more
commonly used in generic project management terminology. It is hoped that those who will interact and
engage with this document will adopt an enthusiastic and proactive approach to this communication
strategy, by rather seeing ‘the problem’ as a challenge.
v
At the time of writing, the most senior ministry members (MP’s) in the South African Ministry of
Communications, are Minister Faith Muthambi and Deputy Minister Stella Ndabeni-Abrahams. The
Government Communication and Information System is the agency arm of the Ministry of
Communications (Ministry | Government Communication and Information System (GCIS), 2015).

18. 18
REFERENCES
Baillie-Stewart, A., 2013. Participatory Communication: Preferred for Southern-African and South
African Development Contexts. Stellenbosch University unpublished research assignment.
Baillie-Stewart, A., 2015. Campaign Comparisons: Why TB Health Trumps the Fight Against Drugs on
South Africa’s Development Agenda. Stellenbosch University unpublished research assignment.
Department of Social Development, Central Drug Authority: Specific Interventions by Government
Departments [online], 2015. Available from:
http://www.dsd.gov.za/cda/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=110&Itemid=138
[Accessed 12 Oct 2015].
Glossary - Parliament of South Africa [online], 2015. Available from:
http://www.parliament.gov.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=85 [Accessed 16 Oct 2015].
Lienert, J., 2010. Stakeholder Importance and Influence | Sustainable Sanitation and Water Management
Institute [online]. Sustainable Sanitation and Water Management. Available from:
http://www.sswm.info/content/stakeholder-importance-and-influence [Accessed 17 Oct 2015].
Mefalopulos, P., 2008. Development Communication Sourcebook: Broadening the Boundaries of
Communication. Washington: © 2008 The International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development/The World Bank.
Ministry | Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) [online], 2015. Available from:
http://www.gcis.gov.za/content/about-us/ministry [Accessed 16 Oct 2015].
National Drug Master Plan [NDMP]: 2013 - 2017, 2013. South African Government Communication
Service (SAGCS).
Roberts, D. and Khattri, N., 2012. Designing a Results Framework for Achieving Results: A How-To
Guide — Aid Effectiveness. Washington: © Independent Evaluation Group for International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank.
Seed Capital Definition | Investopedia [online], 2015. Available from:
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/seedcapital.asp [Accessed 17 Oct 2015].
The International Statistical Institute (ISI) [online], 2015. The International Statistical Institute —
Developing Countries. Available from: http://www.isi-web.org/component/content/article/5-
root/root/81-developing [Accessed 13 Oct 2015].
Tweneboa-Kodua, A., Merrild, C., Muna, L., Mitra, M., Shafique, N.B., Ahmed, N., Rashid, O.,
Hussain, S., Milky, S.H., Taher, T., Bashar, T., and Chowdhury, Z.J., 2008. Writing a
Communications Strategy for Development Programmes: A Guideline for Programme
Managers and Development Officers. Bangladesh: © United Nations Children’s Fund
(UNICEF).
UNDP Developing a Communications Strategy [online], 2014. Available from:
http://web.undp.org/comtoolkit/why-communicate/why-core-concepts-com-strat.shtml
[Accessed 27 May 2014].
Unite for Development Change Management Toolkit : Sample Communications Strategy For Country
Offices [online], 2008. United Nations Development Group. Available from:
http://goo.gl/A8mTL3 [Accessed 17 Oct 2015].
Wakefield, A., 2015. South Africa: Government Has Failed to Keep Their Promises - Maimane.
News24Wire (Cape Town), 10 Oct.
Writing a Communication Strategy [online], 2014. Available from:
https://gcn.civilservice.gov.uk/guidance/writing-a-communication-strategy/ [Accessed 12 Sep
2015].
Zonn, L. and Sokout, S., 2008. Elements of a Project Proposal.