Browsing by Subject "theories of change"

In spite of alleged complementarities between human rights and results and their programming approaches (HRBA and RBM), a number of criticisms have arisen on how the concept of results-based management can even undermine progress on human rights. This is the case especially if the potential explanations for the tensions are ignored. This puzzle is a point of my departure in exploring the relationship between human rights and result based management. The overall aim of this thesis is to contribute to the discussions and understanding of the relationship between human rights, results and effectiveness agendas and their theoretical and operational interplay. The aim is especially to highlight the complementarities between the agendas, but also address the limitations and tensions but also the ‘better fit’ solutions between the two approaches. My main method was an appraisal of theoretical and empirical literature. An important finding is, that there is no inherent conflict between rights and results initiatives, but that tensions arise rather when the narrow, technical interpretation of results management is adopted to transformative work. The mainstream results-based management assumes that change occurs in a linear fashion where a set of activities results in outputs, outcomes and ultimately impact. However, the transformative vision of both human rights and rights-based agendas in development described in this thesis, establishes a much more complex causal chain and therefore collides with some basics assumptions behind the traditional RBM assumptions. However, findings indicate that RBM can be used for a variety of practices, including by complexity theory and social change theory. But in order to work, RBM needs to occur in accordance with the particularities and nature of the activity to be implemented. Theories of change – a central tool of RBM models – are considered as a good tool to reframe the results artefacts and communicate the assumptions and particularities behind change of each sector involved in development cooperation. In conclusion chapter I propose alternatives to the most problematic assumptions behind RBM models and offering different assumptions behind social change from human rights perspective.