The Principle of Accountability in Human Rights-Based Approaches to Development: Towards a New Understanding

IF 0.9 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Journal of Human Rights Practice Pub Date : 2024-01-18 DOI:10.1093/jhuman/huad068
Ysaline Reid
{"title":"The Principle of Accountability in Human Rights-Based Approaches to Development: Towards a New Understanding","authors":"Ysaline Reid","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Human rights-based approaches to development (HRBADs) have been pointed out as the most accomplished form of integration of human rights in development. Despite the growing talks among development practitioners on the need for human rights-based approaches to development policies and practices, it remains unclear what exactly the human right principle of accountability at the heart of these approaches consists of. This article seeks to unravel some of the difficulties. What does the principle of accountability mean? Who is accountable and to whom? What does it mean for current development practice? Reflecting on these questions, this article critically delves into policy, guidance, operational documents, evaluations, and other analyses by a selected number of bilateral development agencies. This desk-based research is in some cases backed by semi-structured interviews designed to provide a review of the current approaches to applying the principle of accountability. The article sheds light on how the principle of accountability is understood and applied by those agencies, and notes challenges and inconsistencies. It argues that the principle of accountability should be made fit for purpose so as not to become mere political rhetoric without practical meaning in development practice. It is thus contended that development agencies and state donors should move beyond understanding the principle of accountability as one that is grounded in internal accountability mechanisms and systems of evaluation and aim for holding all stakeholders, including themselves, accountable to the rights-holders of their development programmes and projects.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Human rights-based approaches to development (HRBADs) have been pointed out as the most accomplished form of integration of human rights in development. Despite the growing talks among development practitioners on the need for human rights-based approaches to development policies and practices, it remains unclear what exactly the human right principle of accountability at the heart of these approaches consists of. This article seeks to unravel some of the difficulties. What does the principle of accountability mean? Who is accountable and to whom? What does it mean for current development practice? Reflecting on these questions, this article critically delves into policy, guidance, operational documents, evaluations, and other analyses by a selected number of bilateral development agencies. This desk-based research is in some cases backed by semi-structured interviews designed to provide a review of the current approaches to applying the principle of accountability. The article sheds light on how the principle of accountability is understood and applied by those agencies, and notes challenges and inconsistencies. It argues that the principle of accountability should be made fit for purpose so as not to become mere political rhetoric without practical meaning in development practice. It is thus contended that development agencies and state donors should move beyond understanding the principle of accountability as one that is grounded in internal accountability mechanisms and systems of evaluation and aim for holding all stakeholders, including themselves, accountable to the rights-holders of their development programmes and projects.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于人权的发展方法中的问责原则:实现新的理解
基于人权的发展方式(HRBADs)被认为是将人权纳入发展的最成功形式。尽管发展实践者越来越多地谈到有必要在发展政策和实践中采用基于人权的方法,但这些方法的核心--人权问责原则--究竟包括哪些内容,仍然不甚明了。本文试图解开其中的一些难题。问责原则的含义是什么?谁对谁负责?它对当前的发展实践意味着什么?为了对这些问题进行思考,本文以批判的态度深入研究了一些双边发展机构的政策、指 导方针、业务文件、评估和其他分析。在某些情况下,这种案头研究还辅以半结构式访谈,目的是对当前应用问责原则的方法进行审查。文章揭示了这些机构是如何理解和运用问责原则的,并指出了存在的挑战和不一致之 处。文章认为,应使问责原则符合目的,以免在发展实践中仅成为没有实际意义的政治空谈。因此,报告认为,发展机构和国家捐助方不应将问责原则理解为以内部问责机制和评估制度为基础的原则,而应着眼于使包括其自身在内的所有利益攸关方对其发展方案和项目的权利拥有者负责。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
80
期刊最新文献
Administrative Lawfare at the European Union’s External Borders: Some Perspectives on Administrative Regulation of NGO Search and Rescue Activities in Italy and the Situation at the Polish-Belarusian Border Specificity in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights A Jurisdictional Vertigo: Compulsory Arbitration, Sports and the European Court of Human Rights Forced Marriages in Times of Armed Conflict: An Implicit Paradox of Modern Slavery under International Humanitarian Law The Politics of Ambiguous Loss: Missing Persons and Social Ecologies after Armed Conflict
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1