The Governance Programming Framework in Context Governance Programming Framework – GPF Synthesis Workshop

Michael DrinkwaterApril 2011

A Short History of Program Quality in CARE

• 1996-2000 LRSP: Introduction of HLS and Partnership Focus. LRSPs introduced. New project design cycle and program manual. PSMI developed

• 2000-2006 LRSP: Introduction of RBAs • 2003: RBA Characteristics become CI Program Principles• 2004-05: Unifying Framework developed• 2005: Women’s Empowerment SII begun• 2007: Program Approach incorporated in new CARE USA

SP. Already demonstrated in LAC• April 2008: Istanbul conference launches learning lab and

satellites strategy• May 2008: Program definition and characteristics adopted

by CI Program Working Group and approved CI Executive Committee Jan 2011

• 2010-11: GPF developed and reviewed

How does Governance fit in?• Significance of RBA shift in early 2000s – CARE moving towards

facilitatory rather than service delivery role

• Governance Working Group 2003-04o ‘Towards an Understanding of Governance’ (Jan 2004)

• Governance in Cities Workshop, Lusaka, March 2004o ‘Moving into Reality: Building a culture of engagement to support the

emergence of negotiated development’

• One of four core underlying causes in the Unifying Framework (2004)

• Regions Work (2006-07):o Research on neo-patrimonialism in West Africa Governance Theme Team in

SWARMU (2006-07)

o East Africa Discrimination, Inequality and Governance (DIG) Regional Strategy

o LACRMU review of experience

Towards an Understanding of Governance

•

Towards an Understanding of Governance

A Definition of Good Governance

For CARE, good governance is the effective, participatory, transparent and accountable management of public affairs guided by agreed upon procedures and principles to achieve the goals of poverty reduction and increasing social justice

Adapted from Ford Foundation definition

Urban Governance Programming

"Governance is the single most important issue for eradicating poverty". Kofi Annan, 2000

The Thesis For community driven development (CDD) to be effective, communities must have the capacity to carry out development related activities and make demands on service providers, primarily [but not solely] government authorities. Government must have the willingness and capacity to respond. Effective mechanisms to link community and government must operate in a conducive, enabling environment. In essence, there must be the ability of the community to ‘demand’ development and the government to work to ‘supply’ it. (Garrett 2003).Garrett, James. Community Empowerment and Scaling up in Urban Areas: The Evolution of PUSH / PROSPECT in Zambia. IFPRI, December, 2003.

CARE’s Shif ting Role – The New Model

CARE &others

Other NGOs& CBOs

CommunitiesOr rights bearers

Duty bearers or other stakeholdersNegotiated development

Unifying Framework (2004-05)

Poverty Eradication

& Social Justice

Slightly modified d iagram developed

by CARE Somalia staff 2004

Unifying Framework for Poverty Eradication & Social Justice

ENABLING ENVIRONMENT

(Improving Governance)

HUMAN CONDITIONS(Increasing Opportunity)

Access to Resources& Services

Accumulationof Capital& Assets

Productivity,Livelihoods,

& Income

Human Capabilities

SOCIAL POSITIONS(Improving Social Equity)

DistributionCapital

& Assets

SocialInclusion

Rights,Responsibilities,

& Dignity

GenderEquity

Civil Society

ParticipationGovernance for Equity & Opportunity

Private Sector

Accountability

EnvironmentalStewardship

InternationalArena

InternationalArena

InternationalArena

FailingGovernance

Systems

4 Key Underlying Causes of Poverty

Unmet Rights to Access to Resources& Services

GenderInequity

SocialExclusion

Unifying Framework for Poverty Eradication & Social Justice

ENABLING ENVIRONMENT

(Improving Governance)

HUMAN CONDITIONS(Increasing Opportunity)

Access to Resources& Services

Accumulationof Capital& Assets

Productivity,Livelihoods,& Income

Human Capabilities

SOCIAL POSITIONS(Improving Social Equity)

DistributionCapital

& Assets

SocialInclusion

Rights,Responsibilities,

& Dignity

GenderEquity

Civil Society

ParticipationGovernance for Equity & Opportunity

Private Sector

Accountability

EnvironmentalStewardship

InternationalArena

InternationalArena

InternationalArena

FailingGovernance

Systems

4 Key Underlying Causes of Poverty

Unmet Rights to Access to Resources& Services

GenderInequity

SocialExclusion

Unifying Framework

Outcome Areas

Program Areas

Underlying Causes of Poverty and Social Injustice

Human Conditions

(Increasing Opportunity)

Social Positions

(Improving Social Equity)

Enabling Environment

(Improving Governance)

Gender Inequity

Social Exclusion

UnequalRights of Access to

Resources and

Services

WeakGovernance

Systems

Driving our Discourse: Strategic Impact Inquiry at CARE

GoalDeepen a culture of learning and critical inquiry through:

Accountability

Offer stakeholders in and out of CARE

evidence to assess our work

Continuous Improvement Empowering Analysis

Use participatory, rights-based methods that are

empowering in themselves

Research for organizational action.

Aggressively share lessons with others

ADVOCACYPROGRAMQUALITY

RIGHTS BASED APPROACH

The SII on Women’s Empowerment: In a Nutshell

What contributions are CARE programs making, if any, to the

empowerment of women and the advancement of gender equity?

What internal, organizational variables are associated with higher –

and lower – levels of impact on women’s empowerment and improving gender equity?

Year 1 - Launching•In depth site research (5 sites); Desk analyses of evaluations, proposals, C-Pin

Year 2 - Broadening•In depth site research (24 sites); Desk analysis of C-pin, Promising Practices Inquiry

Year 3 - Probing•In-depth comparative research (6 sites) on empowerment and HIV/AIDS risk

Year 4- Knowledge Sharing•Summarizing, producing program guidance, publishing and promoting externally

24 countries35 (+1000) projects+350 staff; 5 CI members

Sub-Dimensions

1. Self-image; self-esteem2. Legal / rights awareness3. Information / skills4. Educational attainment5. Employment / control of labour

6. Mobility in public space7. Decision making and influence in household finance & child-rearing8. Group membership / activism9. Material assets owned10. Body health / integrity

Structural11. Marriage/Kinship

rules and roles12. Inclusive &

equitable notions of citizenship

13. Transparent info & access to services

14. Enforceability of rights, access to justice15. Market accessibility (labour/credit/goods)16. Political representation17. Share of state budgets18. Density of civil society representation

Relational19. Consciousness of

self / others as interdependent

20. Negotiation / accommodationhabits

21. Alliance / coalition habits22. Pursuit / acceptance of accountability23. New social forms

Agency

RelationsStructure

Outcome or Process? Indicators, or entry points?

What/who makes change

happen?

StructureRoutines, conventions, relationships and taken-for-

granted behavior

Institutions that establish agreed-upon significations (meanings), accepted forms of domination (who has power over what or whom), and agreed criteria

for legitimizing the social order

RelationsConnecting with other social actors, building relationships, joint efforts, coalitions, and mutual support, in order to

claim and enact agency, alter structure,

and so realize rights and livelihood security

AgencyCarrying out our own analyses, making our own decisions, and

taking our own actions.Empowerment

involves poor women becoming the agents

of their own development

23Sub-

Dimensions

Women’s Empowerment

Framework

Defining Women’s Empowerment

We understand empowerment as the sum total of changes needed for a woman to realize her full human rights – the interplay of changes in:

her own aspirations and capabilities

(agency)

the environment that surrounds and

conditions her choices (structure)

the power relations through which she must negotiate her

path (relations)

23 Important

Dimensions of Change

Initial Thinking about a Governance SII

• Initially it was envisaged that a series of global action research ‘SIIs’ would be conducted

• A Governance SII was the second envisaged, but annual funding for the SII function was cut in 2008 before this could be initiated.

• Since then the concept has been discussed off and on, but resources for support to governance work at the global level outside CIUK has decreased

• CIUK’s governance team is now the sole source of global support for this thematic area that is crucial to every program in CARE

Governance Context: Foreground

And Background

Governance Process

Different Polities agree on different standards,

norms, balances and outcomes of

“good governance”.

“good governance” is normative: it is democracy. But there are many ways of

being democratic.

In any polity, the definition and normative measures of these are subject to constant change and revision. That these are a constantly moving target must be made central to the SII

Governance Responsibilities

-Inclusion-Equality of Opportunity

-Right to Independent Identity (Autonomy)

-Socio-economic progress-Inter-generational equity

DESIRED STATE

Persistence, strengthening,,

improvem

ent of the polity

Stewardship of public resources: Cultural, Economic, Natural,

Human

Min

imum

Bas

ic S

ervi

ce

Ava

ilabi

lity

and

Equ

itabl

e A

cces

s

Security/Safety

Agreement on the rules of the governance game: markets,

judiciary, contestation, representation, role of state

Voice and Influence of the Governed but particularly the marginal

ContestationAnd

Debate

Accounta-bility

Formal Governance Systems, Processes, Procedures

Informal Governance Norms: Power, Identity, Privilege

Conceptualizing Governance: What Are Its Ends, How Does CARE Help?