CSOs, MAPAS and SDAs: Different contexts divergent theories of change
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•784 vistas
The document discusses different approaches to monitoring water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services across various regions. It notes there are divergent theories of change reflected in different monitoring methods used in Africa, East Asia, Latin America, and South Asia due to varying regional contexts. The monitoring approaches range from in-depth analysis to light political tracking, with trade-offs around country relevance versus global consistency and participatory versus audit processes. Roles in WASH monitoring are identified for countries, which develop and act on their theories of change, versus global actors, which provide methods, analysis, and tracking of inputs and outcomes.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
Similar a CSOs, MAPAS and SDAs: Different contexts divergent theories of change
Similar a CSOs, MAPAS and SDAs: Different contexts divergent theories of change (20)
Más de IRC
Más de IRC (20)
Último
Último (20)
CSOs, MAPAS and SDAs: Different contexts divergent theories of change
- 1. CSOs, MAPAS and SDAs Different contexts divergent theories of change
- 2. Country Status Overviews Benchmark “service delivery pathways” to ID bottlenecks Enabling Developing Sustaining services services services Services Finance Policy? Expenditure? Maintenance/ Markets? Planning? Equity? Expansion/ Uptake? Budget? Output? Use?
- 3. Coverage of CSOs, MAPAS and SDAs
- 4. Regional innovations enhance tools … Highlighting replacement costs Planned vs required funding often >50% in LAC Costing shifts in technology in EAP e.g. from wells to piped systems Medium-term scenarios How current initiatives will strengthen service delivery pathways New indicators Equity City-wide faecal sludge management Water resources New questions How to measure human resource capacity?
- 5. Regional innovations enhance tools … Highlighting replacement costs Changing replacement costs of technologies over time often >50% in LAC 20000 Piped to household Costing shifts in technology in EAP 18000 Piped to standpost Protected Wells e.g. from wells to piped systems 16000 Medium-term scenarios 14000 Annual replacement cst ('000s) How current initiatives will strengthen 12000 service delivery pathways 10000 New indicators 8000 Equity City-wide faecal sludge management 6000 Water resources 4000 New questions 2000 How to measure human resource 0 capacity? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Years
- 6. Regional innovations enhance tools … Highlighting replacement costs Existing TA will strengthen often >50% in LAC enabling pillar … Costing shifts in technology in EAP Enabling Developing Operación y Sustaining Políticas Planes Presupuesto Ejecución Equidad Resultados Expansión Usuarios Mantenimiento e.g. from wells to piped systems Rural WS RWS 2 0 1.5 1 0.5 0.9 0.75 1 1.5 UWS Urban WS 1 0 1 2 0.5 1 1 0.5 0.9 Medium-term scenarios Rural San RSH 1.5 0 1 1 0 0.75 0.75 1 0.375 USH Urban San How current initiatives will strengthen 1.5 0 1 1 0 0 0.6 0.5 0.75 Medium-term scenario service delivery pathways Operación y Políticas Planes Presupuesto Ejecución Equidad Resultados Expansión Usuarios Mantenimiento RWS Rural WS 2.5 1 2.5 1.5 0.5 1.2 0.375 1.5 1.5 New indicators UWS Urban WS 2.5 1 2.5 2 1 1 1.25 0.5 1.2 Equity Rural San RSH 2.5 1 2 1.5 0.5 0.75 1.2 1 1.125 City-wide faecal sludge management USH Urban San 2.5 1 2 1.5 0.5 0.75 0.6 1 0.75 Water resources Source: MAPAS Honduras New questions … but not developing or How to measure human resource sustaining pillars capacity?
- 7. …but raises trade-offs In depth analytical vs Light political tracking CSOs, PEA, WASHcost SANs, AU, GDP Country relevance vs Global consistency Country targets, ODF MDGs, Aid coordination Participatory process vs Audit country demand-led, JSR donor supply-led GLAAS Micro (fast) learning vs Macro (slow) learning Everyone forever (in year) JMP (2-5 year cycles) Doing both leads to unhappy outcomes!
- 8. Divergent regional theories of change Divergent methods reflected both different regional contexts and different theories of change: Africa – Accelerating improved access requires donors to work with and through country systems (Budget, PFM, decentralized delivery) East Asia – Better health and faster economic growth requires piped water supply Latin America – Reaching sustainable universal access in threatened by water resource constraints and climate change South Asia – Better health is contingent on 100% of fecal sludge produced being collected, transported and treated
- 9. Simplify by monitoring the theory of change Cost Y million use unimproved X million people latrines Improved defecate in the Latrines open Unimproved/ Shared Latrine Open Behavior Defecation Change Benefits Community-led Total Sanitation Sanitation Marketing - ENABLING ENVIRONMENT
- 10. Roles in WASH monitoring Country vs Global/Regional 1. Develop theory of 1. Develop and test change for sub-sectors methods and platforms 2. Simplify monitoring 2. Technical assistance to system to fit theory of country monitoring change 3. Action! Deliver 3. Analysis of what services and monitor countries are monitoring the theory of change (theories of change) 4. Learn and adapt 4. Track sub-sector inputs theory of change and outcomes (JMP)
Notas del editor
- Regional scores. Benchmarking of service delivery pathways done in each subsector in each country Policy (Targets in PRSPs, subsector policies, defined institutional roles)Expansion and uptake; Budget (sufficient, comprehensive, identifiable); Equity (criteria for matching need with resources, participation in planning, monitoring of equity)Ingredients – that depend on each other
- Africa (2 rounds 2006 and 2011). By 2016 all 54 African countries will be completedLatin America, completionby 2013: Monitoring Country Progress in Water Supply and Sanitation ( MAPAS) South Asia, completion by 2013South East Asia, completion by 2013
- In LAC - Investment requirements for replacement of capital stock are above 50% of the total requirements in all countries. The infrastructures built in the 70’s/80’s are reaching the end of their lifespan. The countries have no reserve mechanisms in place, so progress in coverage achieved during the past two decades is at risk. With major shifts in technology in EAP – e.g. the shift from point source wells to piped network systems – the costing model has been adapted to show the relative effects of on new vs replacement. The concept of the "medium term scenario" has been introduced which compares the current situation with a second scorecard showing the expected results recognizing existing efforts to improve sector performance.
- In LAC - Investment requirements for replacement of capital stock are above 50% of the total requirements in all countries. The infrastructures built in the 70’s/80’s are reaching the end of their lifespan. The countries have no reserve mechanisms in place, so progress in coverage achieved during the past two decades is at risk. With major shifts in technology in EAP – e.g. the shift from point source wells to piped network systems – the costing model has been adapted to show the relative effects of on new vs replacement. The concept of the "medium term scenario" has been introduced which compares the current situation with a second scorecard showing the expected results recognizing existing efforts to improve sector performance.
- In LAC - Investment requirements for replacement of capital stock are above 50% of the total requirements in all countries. The infrastructures built in the 70’s/80’s are reaching the end of their lifespan. The countries have no reserve mechanisms in place, so progress in coverage achieved during the past two decades is at risk. With major shifts in technology in EAP – e.g. the shift from point source wells to piped network systems – the costing model has been adapted to show the relative effects of on new vs replacement. The concept of the "medium term scenario" has been introduced which compares the current situation with a second scorecard showing the expected results recognizing existing efforts to improve sector performance. The example shown is of Honduras where existing TA initiatives will help to strengthen the enabling pillar but not the developing or sustaining pillars.
- Light political tracking vs In depth analyticalMethod development is adding functions and complexityShould there be a round of simplification?Q: What are the critical pathways OR theory of changeGlobal consistency vs Country relevance Indicator relevance – e.g. Donor coordination not relevant to some counties/regions yet national level often behaves like donor in large federal countries … so questions on funding coordination still relevant to all countries– can funding source management be generalized? Indicator specificity – Some regions defined method specific indicators e.g ODF villages – Is this now an industry standard? Elements of method get embedded in country systems but rarely wholesaleMay be embedded in sector policy and governance components of WSS operations (Panama, Liberia, Zimbabwe) but rarely wholesaleHow to get standardized aggregatable indicators globally? Q: What is the point of global consistency if it is not relevant to countriesParticipatory process (donor supply-led)vs Audit (country demand-led)More participation = more country interest and continued useParticipation challenging in countries where the government has shown limited willingness to work with development partners. There is still value in documenting the state and challenges of the sector in such countries, but the ambition of SDAs as a catalyst for sector reform, should be scaled back.Micro (fast) learning vs Macro (slow) learning Only allowing course corrections every 5 to 10 yearsOften difficult to identify causes of trendsNot encouraging the development of country systems
- The ladder: Bottom of the ladder = open defecation; 30% of the population defecate in the open in Sub-Saharan Africa. First rung = traditional latrines/ shared latrines – 51% of population use traditional latrines in Africa; next rung improved latrines (SanPlats, Vip, pour flush etc) up to flush toilet with septic tank (this is for rural)Drawing a line between improved and unimproved sanitation is not easy. The boundary between traditional unimproved and improved is porous because the extent to which latrines deliver the intended health benefit depends on the way they are used – i.e. human behavior. Basic latrines can provide sufficient protection but : “Even improved latrines can sometimes fail to provide sanitary protection if not used properly”AICD- Behavior can relapse so people can go down as well as up the ladder. AICD notes 0.9% of GDP needed to meet MDGs – of that 0.5% for investment but 0.4 % for O&M and rehabilitation of existing hardware. O&M and rehabilitation about maintaining behaviors, investment is about adopting new behaviors. We know that hardware without behavior change does not lead to improved health outcomes therefore behavior change approaches to scaling up sanitation are essential. WSP has looked at promising developments for sanitation interventions at scale using behavior change approaches. The two that WSP is focusing on are 1) CLTS to reduce Open defecation behaviors (in Uganda, Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Mozambique) and Sanitation Marketing to move people up the sanitation ladder by creating demand for improved sanitation and meeting that with the necessary supply (Tanzania, Malawi, Zambia, Benin). In some countries WSP has combined both approaches into an approach called TSSM – Tanzania and starting Ethiopia and UgandaDespite having this combined TSSM approach – it is not a ‘one size fits all’.It is important for approaches to be tailored to suit the country situation.
- Country relevance vs Global consistencyIndicator relevance – e.g. Donor coordination not relevant to some counties/regions yet national level often behaves like donor in large federal countries … so questions on funding coordination still relevant to all countriesSome regions defined method specific indicators e.g. ODF villages Is this now an industry standard?Audit vs Participatory processThe more participation at country level the higher the level of interest and continued useParticipation challenging in countries where the government has shown limited willingness to work with development partners. There is still value in documenting the state and challenges of the sector in such countries, but the ambition of SDAs as a catalyst for sector reform, should be scaled back.Country driven vs Global supplyMay be embedded in sector policy and governance components of WSS operations (Panama, Liberia, Zimbabwe) but rarely wholesale