A rights-based approach to accountability : an exploration of the RBA theory as a mechanism of downward accountability in development and humanitarian NGOs

Abstract

This thesis explores the link between theories of accountability and the rights-based approach in nongovernmental humanitarian and development organizations. It suggests that the rights-based approach (RBA) necessitates a commitment to accountability to the beneficiaries of NGO work. It suggests how the RBA might best incorporate a duty to strengthen accountability to beneficiaries, referred to as "downward accountability." It investigates Oxfam America as a case study and assesses whether Oxfam's RBA meets criteria for strengthening downward accountability and whether this theoretical link is feasible. Overall, this research reveals that Oxfam America literature and staff do not consistently cite a duty to downward accountability as a component of the Oxfam RBA. However, in some cases a duty to downward accountability is implicitly linked to the RBA. Unanticipated findings included that (1) the RBA is vague in terms of how it is operationalized; (2) situational constraints influence the degree to which a project can adopt a rights-based approach; (3) staff expressed confusion about how to implement the RBA; (5) staff seemed motivated to describe projects as being in line with the rights-based approach, even when connection to the RBA was tenuous.

(cont.) I suggest that identified RBA impacts be reframed as guiding questions in order to direct the development, implementation, and evaluation of projects. These guiding questions should explicitly identify NGOs as duty-bearers in relation to downward accountability. I build on Rand & Watson's (2007) depiction of a rights-based continuum and suggest that projects can be actively moved along this continuum, progressing from traditional to more rights-based. I suggest that this is true as well for downward accountability, and outline how guiding questions can help frame project evaluation in order to progressively strengthen downward accountability. Suggestions of areas for further inquiry include: (1) Beneficiaries' perceptions of accountability mechanisms and the rights-based approach. (2) Whether an articulated duty to downward accountability would create incentives to adhere to this duty. (3) Longitudinal studies examining whether projects do tend to become more rights-based and/or more accountable to beneficiaries over time, and if so what are the factors that enable this progression.