-By applying a human rights lens, development is understood as unequivocally people-centered.
-We know democracy, development and human rights are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. Therefore, sustainability has to be understood as having the political, social, institutional, technical and financial dimensions closely interwoven.
1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the two covenants and the seven human rights (HR) conventions place emphasis on individual human beings rather than, more generally, on ‘all people’.
2. Nevertheless, in HR work:
• Equity demands that outcomes/benefits are equitably distributed (in accordance with the relative needs of different people or groups) –ergo, to greater needs, greater benefits, or, to all according to their needs.
• Equality demands that all who are eligible do participate on an equal basis and that no one is excluded or is discriminated against on any ground. State actions cannot discriminate and must afford everyone equal treatment.
3. In pursuing equity and equality, benchmarks must be set to define where the country should be at specific intermediate-points-in-time so as to progressively attain the more long-term HR goals.
4. Furthermore, in our work, we routinely engage in Capacity Analysis and in Vulnerability Analysis. Let us look what these entail:
5. In capacity analysis, we ask:
• Who are the duty bearers in relation to the reality of a certain HR in a specific setting?
• What are their specific corresponding/correlative obligations and responsibilities (duties)? (Here, we come up with a list of obligations for each main duty bearer, including state and non-state actors).
• How is their performance judged in meeting their duties?
• Why are these identified duty bearers not meeting their duties?
• What are the gaps in their capacity hindering them from meeting their obligations and responsibilities?
6. You are reminded here that capacity analysis identifies areas for remedial follow-up actions including capacity strengthening; it provides a basis for a constructive dialogue, because the constraints that duty bearers face in meeting their responsibilities are identified and understood by claim holders so that commensurate solutions can be worked out.
7. But in capacity analysis, it is necessary to balance complexity with focus. This means we end up having to select the main duty bearers and the most serious capacity gaps so we can effectively focus on those gaps and those duty bearers where remedy is most urgently needed…and realistically possible.
8. As a complement to capacity analysis, budget analysis results can reflect what is allocated and what has been spent on HR-related interventions –but, beware! not what ought to be spent! Budget analysis also does not provide direct insights into the effectiveness and efficiency of actual expenditures and into how well poor and marginalized groups’ rights are actually being fulfilled.
9. So, remember: In the HR-based framework, the primary concern is with ‘what ought to be’. An analysis that only aims to find out ‘what is’ and ‘why’ is by itself insufficient!
10. In vulnerability analysis we address the presence of factors that place people at risk –including factors that affect people’s capacity to deal with the negative impact of ever-present risk factors. Vulnerability refers to the combined exposure to one or more risks and to the capacity to withstand and overcome the effects of such specific risk or risks. Vulnerability analysis uses the household as the unit of analysis. We therefore ask:
• Who is the population at risk?
• In that population, what are the households most at risk?
• Where are they found physically/geographically?
• How many are they?
• What causes them to be at risk?
• What do they think needs to be done?
11. To answer these questions credibly, vulnerability analysis has to involve as many of the different claim holders as possible.
12. Note that repeated analyses most often show changes in vulnerability since external shocks, structural factors, political, demographic, socio-economic, institutional and environmental factors influence vulnerability –and constantly change. Actions will then build on people’s increasing capacity to withstand and overcome risks and shocks. The results of a vulnerability analysis tell a story related to the equity of the policies at hand and ultimately their impact.
13. As regards monitoring in HR work, we often use ‘HR gold standards’, i.e., from the HR perspective, we ask:
• What would one need to see for an intervention to be fully HR compliant in all its dimensions?
14. This comparison with a standard helps us in our analytical work in that it provides clarity in examining in what aspects the programs implemented and their impact do not conform to HR principles. It further facilitates making specific recommendations for remedial actions to strengthen the HR underpinnings of such a program.
15. The ways in which claim holders can use the HR-based monitoring information are multiple; among them: to acquire greater awareness and understanding of what their HR entitle them to; to stake claims, to participate in public policy debates and in social control mechanisms that hold duty bearers accountable; to plan self-reliant actions to address their priority problems; and to further political and social mobilization.
16. The greater the direct involvement of community residents in monitoring, the more likely the monitoring process will conform to HR principles.
17. So, when is community monitoring truly HR-based?: When the agenda is set by the community; when residents have equal opportunity to participate; when participation empowers and gives skills; when residents are fully informed about results; and when community monitors are acceptable to the whole community.
Claudio Schuftan Ho Chi Minh City
cschuftan@phmovement.org