 |
In Brief: |
What
are the implications of a sustainable livelihoods (SL) approach
for the logical framework or logframe? Although many practitioners
find logframes useful, they have also received considerable criticism
from staff within development agencies; from trainers who try to
convey appropriate methodologies for generating them; and from partners
who are required to produce them in order to get funding. This brief
note aims to outline some of the ways in which logframes and the
SL approach are neither complementary nor compatible, and proposes
an alternative 'framework' for consideration and comment (See: Kath
Pasteur).
Rick Davies questions some of the conclusions of the above paper,
particularly with regard to the different positions of NGOs in the
implementation and continued use of logframes.
Sarah Earl points out how the development of 'Outcome Mapping' has
addressed similar issues to the questions raised by logframes. How
are livelihoods approaches actually being used in a range of development
interventions? This question is also explored by a new research
project Goodbye to Projects aiming to identify and clarify the challenges
to the design, appraisal and implementation of development interventions
and changes required from the adoption of a livelihoods approach.
The first working paper produced by the project is a bibliography
the livelihoods approach, and the implications for mananging interventions
using the livelihoods and other new approaches such as SWAps and
a 'rights-based' approach. The project's questionnaire on development
interventions is now available on the LC post-it board.
A
paper presented at the European Evaluation Society annual conference
shows to what extent the logframe can usefully be employed by development
agencies as a way of representing change processes.
|