Form HE(S→O)
GSAPS THE SUMMARY OF DOCTORAL THESIS
Capturing Human Rights in Development Evaluation
The case of an anti-trafficking project in Myanmar.
4012S318-3 Sabine Becker-Thierry E. Chief Advisor: Prof. Yasushi Katsuma
Keywords: Development evaluation, rights-based, participatory methods, human trafficking, Myanmar
After a difficult history of the convergence and separation of human rights and development, the international community has continued to embrace human rights since the late 1990s (Uvin, 2004). This is apparent in their planning and implementation of human development interventions.
Today, many international governmental and non-governmental organizations refer to human rights mainstreaming in development programming, or even a human rights-based approach (HRBA): all results of an intervention are expected to contribute to the improved human rights of the rights holders and duty bearers (HRBA Portal, n.d.). Human security and anti-human trafficking are closely connected to this; security overlaps with human rights in many areas while trafficking is a violation of human rights. It is expected that the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) include crosscutting topics (including human rights) when being evaluated.
Looking at the evaluation theory organized by Alkin (2013), human rights have only indirectly been included in assessments of development interventions. Some scholars focus on the use of evaluation by underlining the importance of understanding the beneficiaries/rights holders. They also utilize evaluation as a vehicle to empower them (Fetterman). Others look more at the system and values in which development operations take place and see evaluation as contributing to social justice (Mertens). In the evaluation practice, most actors keep underlining the importance of human rights in programming, but when evaluating their programs, they remain focused on other crosscutting topics, such as gender quality or equity.
There is a disconnection between the requirements and expectations of embedding human rights in development programming and the reality of assessing that programming.
In Myanmar, human trafficking is a serious problem, including in the North Eastern area that shares a border with China. The Young Men’s Christian Association and Norwegian Church Aid have been working at the community level to raise awareness about human trafficking and to support victims. Although their work does not explicitly focus on human rights, they heavily rely on community volunteers and are deeply rooted in the community. They have an interest in empowering the community while supporting others as well as in analyzing the effects of their work.
Pursuing the overall objective of demonstrating that adding a human rights dimension in development evaluation is feasible and valuable, by looking through this project at the main research question—“Can anti-trafficking programming benefit from an evaluation with a human rights component?”—offers an excellent fit: Human rights are (indirectly) part of the project, the context is relatively stable, and the community is much engaged. This is important also for the participatory methodology.
Methodology: This research consists of a case study carried out in two phases: First, the author conducted a relatively long participatory evaluation of the YMCA Myanmar project. The evaluation framework and instruments expanded on elements from guidance on assessing gender equality, equity and to some extent rights. Second, the author reviewed the experience of that evaluation. This included assessing, again through a participatory approach, how this had changed the evaluation process and dynamics as well as how this had impacted the various stakeholder groups that had been involved throughout. By doing that the two research questions were addressed: (1) How can an evaluation with an added human rights
perspective change the project scope? And (2) how do stakeholders benefit from such an evaluation?
Results: First of all, the evaluation experience confirmed that adding human rights terms and applying a human rights lens already make a difference. In this case study, this widened the project scope from the start by including additional and important stakeholders among the duty bearers.
Looking at the project no longer through a welfare lens but through a rights lens also shifted people’s understanding and perception of the project effects, in particular that so-called ‘beneficiaries’ were not mere passive recipients of others’ charity support. On the contrary, they had high stakes in the project and could offer crucial advice for the project’s success. The approach also helped to uncover aspects that were not considered initially by those who had designed the project to respond to a need. And finally, the approach also led to a different evaluation process: instead of a few days, it demanded continuous stakeholder engagement over nearly one year.
Second, this study underlined that it was well worth the effort. All stakeholder groups that that had been involved throughout the study were able to name benefits this exposure had offered them. It made realize the trafficking victims their own value and importance to the community and a certain degree of empowerment. Those implementing the project gained deeper insights into their own role and contributions to the community while they were reminded about the importance of better functioning in synchronization with others, including government players. Duty bearers, once they felt safe shared their difficulties in protecting human rights and in their fight against trafficking. The donor saw the project in new light and started shifting its anti-trafficking programming in the country.
The approach also showed that human rights in evaluation remain complex and vague. However, the more time and efforts are allotted to explaining and connecting human rights to an individual situation, people start further reflecting on that and sharing their interpretation.
While it remains difficult to attribute these results in their entirety solely to the added human rights component, this study indicates one way of conducting a project evaluation that can approach human rights as a dimension within development results. It underlines the importance of following a holistic approach to anti-trafficking programming and implementation. It also contributes to the current discussions on evaluating the SDGs, in particular to questions about more qualitative, participatory approaches and tools and whether these can assess development outcomes in more facets. The methodology tested here may serve as an entry point.
References
Alkin, M.C. (Ed.). (2013). Evaluation roots. A wider perspective of theorists’ views and influences, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Fetterman, D.M. (1996). Empowerment evaluation: An introduction to theory and practice. In D.M. Fetterman, S.J. Kaftarian, and A.
Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability, pp. 3-48, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Mertens, D.M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation, New York, New York: Guilford Press.
United Nations. (Undated). The UN’s practitioners portal on human rights based approaches to programming, http://hrbaportal.org.
Uvin, P. 2004. Human rights and development, Bloomfield, Connecticut:
Kumarian Press.
