Mohammad Hakimi (Universitas Gadjah Mada)
Ethical issues on community consent

Mohammad Hakimi delivered a detailed and insightful presentation on ethical issues on community consent. He began by reminding us about the definition of consent. A process by which prospective participants indicate their willingness to take part in research and give permission for researchers to undertake acts on them that are necessary for the research. Another term that sounds familiar is informed consent, a decision to participate in research made by a competent individual who has received the necessary information; has adequately understood the information; and after considering the information, has arrived at a decision without having been subjected to coercion, undue influence, inducement or intimidation. For a larger scale of research sometimes we need what is called community consent. The issues that usually come up is the feasibility of entering into a consent process, this due to the considerable differences in the cohesion and structure of communities. However, practical obstacles do not nullify rights but demand flexibility and sensitivity in trying to find ways to express the rights that are due. It rather initiates and facilitates the process of disclosure for individual informed consent, fulfilling four requirements for the ethical conduct of clinical research in developing countries: the need to establish a collaborative partnership, the minimization of risks to the community, disclosure of information, and evidencing and demonstrating respect for subjects.

Alan Mee (World Mosquito Program)
Modified PAM Model- WMP Experience

Alan Mee demonstrated through his empowering presentation the Public Acceptance Model: guides how we listen to, involve and empower our stakeholders and beneficiaries. The Public Acceptance Model (PAM) guides how the WMP listens, involves and empowers community, stakeholders and any other beneficiaries. It was stressed and reaffirmed numerous times how releases of Wolbachia mosquitoes only happens when strong community support is acquired. Engagement can be done through community service, community reference groups or being a host for a mosquito trap or release and the aim is to listen to stakeholders, gain local needs, sensitivity and concerns. Diverse methods are used depending on the communities needs, a combination of methods are always used sometimes campaigns, broadcasting ads, street theatre and face to face. After the initial community engagement activities are complete an independent study is done to determine the percentage of community support before the release of the mosquitoes. Alan Mee proudly demonstrated that their results show high acceptance levels that illustrate the WMP community engagement strategies work, Mexico 92%, Colombia 93%, Brazil 86%, Sri Lanka 98%, Australia 90%. He believe strongly that community engagement is about meaningful relationships and giving community members an active role in seeing the release of the mosquitos or keeping the box or trap at their house has positive impacts on trust and understanding. The PAM principles include; responsive, respectful, transparent and inclusive. The methods used are to build understanding, create awareness, involve community and gain acceptance. The indicators this PAM model uses to measure the community are ready to accept are; media positive, awareness high, community reference group endorses, acceptance high, issues resolved, opposition engaged and campaign delivered. Alan Mee closed by asking some questions about the future for PAM,how do we scale community engagement as we scale? How can technology play an increasing role and how do we sustain diversity? Are there any new methods or practices we can adopt? Some thinking points for you to take home.

Citra Indriani (World Mosquito Program Yogyakarta)
Measuring and monitoring community acceptance survey in Wolbachia implementation

Citra Indriani has delivered her insightful presentation regarding the measuring and monitoring community acceptance survey in Wolbachia implementation. She began by reminding us about the quasi-experimental study that has been implemented before. Because after that study, there was an acceptance study focusing on the raising awareness and issue management of Wolbachia technology in Yogyakarta. The study was conducted in three periods, November 2015, June 2016, and November 2016. Using the cross-sectional household survey, the study aims to show preference on communication and decision-making and acceptance of Wolbachia technology. The sample size of the study varies through the periods. But, one thing for sure there’s an increase in respondent awareness and knowledge about the Wolbachia technology on each period, from 15%, 22%, and 31% respectively. There is also a decreasing number of respondents regarding the negative impact of Wolbachia. This indicates, the public trust about the program is always growing. Other things like community support, there is a lot of support for the Wolbachia technology being implemented. Their acceptance, also more than 50%, or simply more than a half of the respondent agree the Wolbachia will be implemented. From the study we also can tell that the preferred way to communicate Wolbachia is through the community meeting, mass media/poster, and the online media/media social. They also preferred the type of consent is the community consent through community meeting. All the community engagement processes are recorded in the SIS (Stakeholder Inquiry System). From the same system, we also can conclude that the method which was used by WMP Yogyakarta is effective to maintain the public acceptance for the Wolbachia technology.