OHCHR
OFFICE OF THE UNITED NATIONS
HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS |
PROGRAM ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN DEVELOPMENT
Harvard School of Public Health |
MHR MEASUREMENT AND HUMAN RIGHTS PROGRAM
Harvard Kennedy School
Carr Center for Human Rights Policy |
Expert meeting
on Methodological Issues of Qualitative
and Quantitative Tools for Measuring Compliance with
the Right to Development
Background note
(UPDATED 15 JANUARY 2009)
Introduction
-
The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR),
in cooperation with The Measurement and Human Rights Program
of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Harvard
Kennedy School of Government and the Program on Human Rights
in Development at the Harvard School of Public Health is
convening an expert meeting on progressive development
and refinement of the right to development criteria. The
meeting of experts in qualitative and quantitative evaluation
of development activities will function as an independent
expert consultation under the responsibility of the host
institution and OHCHR, facilitated by interested international
institutions. The final product will involve a publication
and eventual submission to the highest human rights policy
organs of the United Nations, the Human Rights Council
and the General Assembly. This document explains the background
of the exercise.
Mandate of the high-level task force on the implementation
of the right to development
-
The UN Commission on Human Rights (CHR, which was replaced
by the UN Human Rights Council since June 2006) entrusted
its Working Group on the Right to Development (Working
Group) with monitoring and reviewing progress in the promotion
and implementation of the right to development (CHR resolution
1998/72). The Working Group, in turn, created a High Level
Task Force on the Implementation of the Right to Development
(Task Force), and requested it to examine MDG 8, on global
partnership for development, and suggest criteria for its
periodic evaluation with the aim of improving the effectiveness
of global partnerships with regard to the realization of
the right to development (CHR res. 2005/4).
-
The Working Group agreed to the criteria developed by the Task
Force (ref. E/CN.4/2006/26) and requested the Task Force
to apply them to development partnerships such as African
Peer Review Mechanism, the ECA/OECD‑DAC Mutual Review of
Development Effectiveness, the Paris Declaration on Aid
Effectiveness and the Cotonou Agreement between African,
Caribbean and Pacific countries and the European Union.
-
Throughout the deliberations of the Task Force and the Working
Group, experts and delegates stressed the importance of
developing methodologically rigorous criteria, sub-criteria,
checklists, indicators, and other tools of evaluating partnership.
At its January 2008 session, the Task Force observed that
“[I]n order to achieve the desired level of quality, the
task force considers that the criteria must (a) become
analytically and methodologically rigorous; (b) provide
empirically-oriented tools to those involved in implementing
development partnerships that can improve the outcomes
of their work in light of their respective mandates; (c)
integrate analytical work done by expert groups within
World Bank, OECD, UNDP, UNCTAD, UNICEF, UNESCO, DESA, OHCHR,
and others, as well as academic research centres, and (d)
provide guidance so that global partnerships for development
are enabled to respond better to the broader objectives
of the right to development.”
-
At its ninth session in August 2008, the Working Group recommended
that the Task Force “give priority to improving the criteria
in the light of the lessons learned from their application
and taking into account the [1986] Declaration on the Right
to Development and other relevant international instruments
as well as the views expressed by States at the current
session, with a view to submitting, …, a revised list of
criteria that serve the purposes set out in all relevant
provisions of [Human Rights] Council resolution 4/4.” (ref.
A/HRC/9/17).
-
The Working Group also requested the Task Force to draw on
the necessary expertise to (a) make the criteria analytically
and methodologically rigorous; (b) provide empirically-oriented
tools to those involved in implementing development partnerships;
and (c) ensure that they cover Millennium Development Goal
8, including target 8.A and other aspects not covered to
date by the task force.”
Purpose of the Consultation
-
The consultation is aimed at facilitating the implementation
of the mandate of the Task Force as explained above. It
will provide an opportunity to facilitate expert assessments
of the current criteria used by the Task Force (see Annex)
and revise them with the view to making them operational
and reflective of standards of qualitative and quantitative
evaluation used in international institutions and recognized
by the leading social scientists. The consultation will
not be bound by the choice of language and implied indicators
of the current criteria but will keep the objectives of
the mandate of the Task Force in mind while proposing a
more rigorous approach than that reflected in the current
set of criteria. The consultation will draw attention to
what can be accomplished with methodological rigor, notwithstanding
the extremely broad range of issues covered by the right
to development and the complexities of the partnerships
the Task Force is called upon to evaluate in light of MDG
8.
-
The consultation will not seek to define an exhaustive set
of indicators and methods of evaluation of all aspects
of the right to development relevant to each partnership
but will rather seek to propose a practical approach to
periodic evaluation of partnership and a reasonable set
of measurable criteria. It will examine critically the
current criteria and – leaving political considerations
aside – advise as to what criteria can be meaningfully
applied, what existing indicators would be relevant, what
experience could be drawn upon to understand the strengths
and weaknesses of evaluating the sorts of issues covered
in the 1986 Declaration on the Right to Development, and
the steps that should be taken to make the evaluation periodic
and thus provide meaningful data over time.
-
Specifically, the issues which will be addressed in the consultation
are:
-
Clarification of the meaning of the right to development for
the purposes of periodic evaluation;
-
Clarification of the partnerships to be evaluated under MDG
8;
-
Lessons learned from other efforts to introduce human rights
consideration into the qualitative and quantitative assessment
of development policies, programmes and projects;
-
Critical review and suggestions for the refinement of the current
criteria proposed by the TF;
-
Suggestions for the specific sub-criteria or indicators under
each criterion capable of providing tools of measurement
of conformity with the right to development;
-
Suggestions for the thematic expansion of existing criteria
to cover other thematic issues under MDG 8;
-
Relation between MDG8 specific criteria and a “comprehensive
and coherent set of guidelines” on implementation of the
right to development.
Working Papers and Background documents
-
Mr. Rajeev Malhotra, OHCHR consultant, is expected to make
presentation for discussion at the meeting. The presentation
will examine critically the wording of each criterion and
comment briefly on (a) why it is acceptable as is, (b)
what is fundamentally wrong with it, or (c) how it could
be better if reformulated and what that new formulation
should be. The author will also add a list of relevant
extant indicators and/or explain what indicator(s) would
need to be established and data collected to assess meaningfully
the fulfilment of the criterion in question. Following
the consultation, the author will be asked to prepare and
submit a paper on the topic taking into account the outcome
of the discussion. The paper will be shared with the Task
Force at its next annual session, scheduled for 1-9 April
2009.
-
In addition to the above-mentioned papers, there will be two
background documents:
-
a compilation of documents on the right to development
of particular relevance to the methodological issues,
and
-
a bibliography of writing on methodological issues
concerning MDGs and right to development and of
indicators and criteria applied to similar evaluation
exercises.
ANNEX
Criteria for Periodic Evaluation of Global Development Partnerships
from a Right to Development Perspective (as revised
by the task force at its fourth session, January 2008)
To facilitate their application, the criteria remain
organized in three groups related to development partnerships:
structure and institutional framework, process and outcome.
Structure/institutional framework
The extent to which a partnership:
-
Contributes to creating an enabling environment for sustainable
development and the realization of all human rights;
-
Draws on all relevant international human rights instruments,
including those relating to the right to development, in
elaborating the content of development strategies and tools
for monitoring and evaluating their implementation;
-
Promotes good governance, democracy and the rule of law and
effective anticorruption measures at the national and international
levels;
-
Follows a human rights-based approach to development, and integrates
the principles of equality, non-discrimination, participation,
transparency, and accountability in its development strategies;
-
Establishes priorities that are responsive to the needs of
the most vulnerable and marginalized segments of the population,
with positive measures to realize their human rights;
-
Recognizes mutual and reciprocal responsibilities among the
partners, taking into account their respective capacities
and resources and the special vulnerability of Least Developed
Countries;
-
Ensures that human rights obligations are respected in all
aspects of the relationship between the partners, through
harmonization of policies;
Process
The extent to which a partnership:
-
Ensures that adequate information is freely available to enable
effective public scrutiny of its policies, working methods
and outcomes;
-
Promotes gender equality and the rights of women;
-
Provides for the meaningful consultation and participation
of all stakeholders, including affected populations and
their representatives, as well as relevant civil society
groups and experts, in processes of elaborating, implementing
and evaluating development policies, programmes and projects;
-
Respects the right of each State to determine its own development
policies in accordance with international law, and the
role of national parliaments to review and approve such
policies.
-
Includes fair institutionalized mechanisms of mutual accountability
and review, through which the fulfilment by all partners
of their agreed commitments is monitored and publicly reported,
responsibility for action is indicated, and effective remedies
are provided;
-
Monitors and evaluates progress in achieving development strategies
by carrying out systematic assessments of the human rights
impact of its policies and projects based on appropriate
indicators and contributes to strengthening the capacity
to collect and disseminate timely data, which should be
disaggregated sufficiently to monitor the impacts on vulnerable
population groups and the poor;
Outcome
The extent to which a partnership:
-
Ensures that developing countries, through their own efforts
and through international assistance and cooperation, have
the human and financial resources to implement successfully
development strategies based on these criteria;
-
Establishes, as needed, safety nets, to provide for the needs
of vulnerable populations in time of natural, financial
or other crisis;
-
Achieves the constant improvement of the wellbeing of populations
and all individuals, on the basis of their active, free,
and meaningful participation in development and in the
fair distribution of the benefits, in accordance with article
2, paragraph 3, of the Declaration on the Right to Development;
-
Contributes to development that is sustainable and equitable,
with a view to ensuring continually increasing opportunities
for all and a fair distribution of resources.
|
