Beyond ‘rights-based approaches’? Employing a process and outcomes framework

Abstract

The protection and promotion of human rights is experiencing increased commitment around the globe. Many organisations, groups and movements have strategically employed 'rights-based' agendas in order to advance issues and accomplish particular objectives. However, despite this ongoing mainstreaming and dominance, there is little time to reflect on the efficacy, sustainability and shortcomings of taking rights-based approaches. In this introduction to the volume 'Beyond 'rights-based approaches'?' we think critically aboutand beyond-'rights-based' approaches. As part of our review of the existing literatures (which we organise around three key waves in rights-based focused research), we introduce new research that seeks transformative solutions to systemic patterns of injustice, while considering the real changes in peoples' lives. Central to our discussion is the proposal and then the deployment of a new framework, based on a 'process/ outcome axis'. From this vantage point we identify and discuss how our contributors challenge the prevailing assumptions and practices in the fight for human dignity, by addressing the gap between theory and practice, and between scholars, activists and practitioners.

Rights-Based Approaches in Climate Change, Conservation and Development Initiatives: Preliminary analysis and recommendations from a review of the scholarly literature

“…Participation: This principle means that "every person and all peoples are entitled to active, free and meaningful participation in contribution to, and enjoyment of civil, economic, social, cultural and political development in which human rights and fundamental freedoms can be realized" (UN 2003). Participation-especially of historically marginalized groups-is conceived of as both an end in itself and a means to empower citizens (European Commission 2021;Miller and Redhead 2019). One example is the demands of IPs to participate in decision-making regarding the forests they have historically managed (Sikor and Stahl 2011).…”

“…Non-discrimination: Under this principle, "all human beings are entitled to their human rights without discrimination of any kind, such as race, color, sex, ethnicity, age, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, disability, property, birth or other status as explained by the human rights treaty bodies" (UN 2003). Whereas development programs were designed to support 'poor' people, RBAs seek to reduce discrimination against vulnerable and marginalized groups (Kindornay et al 2012;Miller and Redhead 2019) as this marginalization is one of the causes of their economic poverty (Broberg and Sano 2018). This represents an important shift in focus toward the structural causes of inequality rather than merely its symptoms.…”

“…Some experts propose that this gap can be explained by the fact that RBAs are often at odds with mainstream social, political, and economic dynamics at national levels (Miller and Redhead 2019). This opposition must be addressed to enable change and support rights-based transformations.…”

Culturally adapting a parent psychoeducational intervention for Chinese immigrant families of young children with autism spectrum disorder

“…Given the disparities faced by children with special needs and the US's rights-based approach of social services (Miller & Redhead, 2019), parents of children with disabilities find themselves having to advocate for their children's needs, which presents cultural challenges for Chinese families. Although a rights-based approach has many advantages in challenging structural injustices, it has been criticized for its confrontational nature that may not fit the cultural values of diverse communities.…”

Handbook on Social Protection Systems

“…Prevailing ideas about poverty, vulnerability and the role of social protection in promoting a more gender-transformative agenda further shape programme design and implementation. Indeed, although internationally the notion of a 'social protection floor' has gained considerable traction, rights-based approaches have faltered and, in many contexts, there has been a backlash against long-held entitlements (see Miller and Redhead 2019).…”