Figure - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
Figure: The Five Key Principles of Capacity Building
Source publication
The article offers an easy-to-use indicator for scholars and practitioners to measure whether NGOs, international organizations, and government policies and projects meet the criteria for design and implementation of “capacity building” projects that have been established by various international organizations and that are recognized by experts in...
Similar publications
Environmental taxation efforts to date have mainly focused in the areas of energy, transport and climate. To complement this existing experience, this study investigated the use of economic instruments to address pollution and natural resource use, in order to contribute to a broader development and application of market-based instruments (MBIs), a...
The goal of this toolkit is to help supporters of small and medium forest
enterprises (SMFEs) work more effectively. We have written this toolkit for
‘facilitators’, for example donors at the international level and, most importantly,
government extension services and non-governmental organisations
(NGOs) at the national level. We have not written...
Entrepreneurship policy making in different countries with different degrees of development show a range of diverse policies such as financial support, innovation, technical and consulting, SME development, legislation, administration, employment and training situation. The purpose of this research was to discover creative areas, successful experie...
Citations
... Studies that address the challenges faced by African countries in the context of cycling and walking are lacking. Although capacity building has been acknowledged as a critical component of sustainable development in the literature [26,27], it has seldom been adopted in transport research, government transport policies, and implementation mechanisms. In the African context, understanding capacity building for active travel and devising strategies and frameworks to integrate it are essential. ...
The promotion of active travel is deemed a crucial component of the transition to sustainable urban mobility. Several barriers hinder its policy implementation and uptake. Some evidence suggests that capacity building could be a useful tool for deepening sustainability efforts. This concept involves the development and deployment of skills and resources. However, a clear framework for understanding the dimensions of capacity building for active travel is lacking. Furthermore, most research and findings use cases within a Global North context, constricting implications and transferability to the Global South, especially to African cities. This study responds to the dearth of scholarly work exploring Global South cases and fills a knowledge gap regarding capacity building in the case of active travel. Through a literature review, we examined the dimensions of capacity building that are necessary to improve active travel in selected African countries. We focus on multilevel transportation governance with highlights from five African cities. Our findings suggest that the literature and policies on transport in Africa have key dimensions for capacity building for active travel but lack the introduction of key instruments and strategic pathways to meet these requirements for improved sustainable mobility. We propose a thematic guiding framework that delineates the strategic application of capacity building at three levels of governance. This framework helps integrate capacity building for active travel policies and implementation at the institutional, individual, and environmental levels.
... This change can be attributed to the French phrase 'le renforcement des capacités,' which more closely aligns with the concept of 'capacity development' rather than 'capacity building.' However, the change remains minimal, as many scholars still refer to 'capacity building' as 'capacity development, ' and even use them quite interchangeable [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. The fact that practitioners in the public and non-profit sectors were at the forefront of knowledge production from the start and produced a wealth of gray literature is a remarkable aspect of the evolution of the concept. ...
... Our objective in this study was not to introduce a new definition, synthesize the concept's development, or investigate how it can be used in other disciplines and contexts. Additionally, we do not seek to criticize the effectiveness of capacity building or whether it has had an impact on sustainability, as has been done in the past [18,23,24]. Rather, our objective was to explore what capacity building in Africa could mean in the context of active travel. ...
... Studies that address the challenges faced by African countries in the context of cycling and walking are lacking. Although capacity building has been acknowledged as a critical component of sustainable development in the literature [18,25], this concept has seldom been adopted in transport research, government transport policies, and implementation mechanisms. In the African context, understanding capacity building for active travel and devising strategies and frameworks to integrate it are essential. ...
The promotion of active travel is deemed a crucial component of the transition to sustainable urban mobility. Several barriers hinder its policy implementation and uptake. Some evidence suggests that capacity building could be a useful tool for deepening sustainability efforts. However, a clear framework for understanding the dimensions of capacity building for active travel is lacking. Most research and findings use cases within a Global North context, constricting implications and transferability to the Global South, especially to African cities. This study responds to the dearth of scholarly work exploring Global South cases and fills a knowledge gap regarding capacity building in the case of active travel. Through a literature review, this study examines the dimensions of capacity building that are necessary to improve active travel in selected African countries. We focus on multilevel trans-portation governance, with highlights from five (5) African cities. Our findings suggest that the literature and policies on transport in Africa have key dimensions for capacity building for active travel but lack the introduction of key instruments and strategic pathways to meet these requirements for improved sustainable mobility. We propose a thematic guiding framework under three (3) levels of governance for integrating capacity building for active travel policies and implementation at institutional, individual, and environmental levels.
... Despite the billions of dollars invested in them (World Bank, 2012), capacity building interventions in public administrations and non-profit organizations generally fail to reach their goals (Kühl, 2009;Lempert, 2015). The rate of failure, defined as an intervention that does not meet its own objectives or does not have benefits lasting beyond the length of the projects, hovers around 70% (Armstrong, 2013, p. xii). ...
... However, as Chart 3 shows, this shift remains marginal, since twice as many articles use "capacity building" as "capacity development"; some authors, however, use the two terms interchangeably (e.g. Barakat & Chard, 2002;Godfrey et al., 2002;Lempert, 2015). Both concepts are, however, on the rise in the literature. ...
... First, some author-practitioners point out deficiencies in the practice of capacity building to improve its delivery. Overall, they agree that the meaning of capacity building is "contested" and that there are no agreed standards as to what should be expected in terms of newly built or developed capacity (Barakat & Chard, 2002;Lempert, 2015;Straussman, 2007). Other authors insist on the necessity of building on endogenous processes, since capacity building initiatives are usually donor-driven; and donors rely heavily on international agencies and consultants to implement their projects (Armstrong, 2013;Fagan, 2008;Olowu, 2002). ...
This paper assesses the literature on “capacity building” through a systematic
literature review. Taking concepts as the ontological building blocks of theories, we
ask: what is known about the evolution of capacity building as a concept and what
can that history tell us about its strengths and weaknesses? To this end, we dig into
the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of capacity building. Through this
Foucauldian “archaeological description”, we show that capacity building discourse
has evolved dialectically, with each new concept emerging to address the failings of
earlier concepts. The paper suggests the “new pragmatism” as a theoretical
framework to guide a more rigorous and relevant theory and practice of capacity
building especially for public administration. Rooted in sensitivity to context and
methodological pluralism, the new pragmatism embraces complexity, delivers “bestfit”
rather than “best practice” solutions, and involves researchers and practitioners
in decolonial knowledge co‐creation to tackle capacity building challenges.
... These characteristics limit the effectiveness of many initiatives promoted as capacity development and can maintain or even increase existing power differentials. At the same time, the lack of accountability measures and effectiveness metrics for capacity development programs (Kenny et al., 2010;Lempert 2015 hinder efforts to identify problematic issues or improve capacity development practices. It is necessary to acknowledge and address instances where initiatives labelled as "capacity development" have been inadequate or even exploitative, regardless of intention. ...
... Absent or imprecise definitions could offer a benefit to all partners, by allowing flexibility for context-appropriate capacity development definitions and approaches. Yet there is also a risk that the terms could cause confusion, or be used or misused in ways that perpetuate inequities by providing credibility to certain actors, and privileging certain approaches, types of knowledge and ideologies over others (Kenny et al., 2010;Lempert 2015). This risk is heightened where "capacity building" and "capacity development" become 'buzzwords' limiting meaning, debate, and discussion, and contributing to the continuation of activities that may at best be ineffective or at worst damaging (Kenny et al., 2010;Sink et al., 2021. ...
... Some partnerships, for example monitoring ocean acidification globally, may not be possible unless the human capacity and technology available to all partners is raised, and thus capacity development is central for the success of the partnership as a whole. In other cases, capacity development could be used as leverage for a parallel goal, or even as a cover for a hidden agenda (Lempert 2015). An example of this may be an industry or government partner offering capacity development in exchange for access to resources or political capital, or a foreign research organisation offering capacity building in exchange for access to local resources, subjects, or environments of interest. ...
Capacity development is a major priority in the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (the Decade). Persistent disparities in ocean science capacity illustrate the substantial challenges to achieving the Decade's stated goal of eradicating inequality. We argue that a new conversation about capacity development is essential for the success of the Decade and beyond. We question the meaning, motivations, pathways and measurement of capacity development at this critical juncture. While we do not propose a single answer to these context- and situation-specific questions, we do recognize that the lack of accepted, or even defined, approaches to capacity development, its initiation, leadership, desired outcomes, implementation, and evaluation is failing the global ocean community. Explicit focus and reflection on the power of discourses, definitions, positionality, and perspectives has the potential to greatly improve the experience and outcomes of capacity development programs. This Perspective seeks to stimulate reflection and action to seize the substantial opportunity presented by the Decade to facilitate capacity development solutions toward a more equitable world.
... However, as noted in the above findings, many NGOs do not conduct an internal evaluation process to determine their accountability levels to the communities they serve. This is also supported by scholars such as Lempert (2015), who provided that NGOs established indicators to conduct their internal evaluation from which they can know their accountability level. Due to the multiplicity of indicators, small NGOs found themselves not adhering to the indicators established, hence missing the internal evaluation for accountability. ...
Non-governmental Organisations are key development partners who receive funds and other support from various stakeholders for supporting human development. Receiving funds and other supports require a well-established accountability framework to which most NGOs do not adhere. The downward and upward accountability phenomena seem overly complicated for NGOs to strike a balance as they have diverse and antagonistic interests. Given that scenario, it was imperative to examine how the existing mechanisms, influence the accountability of NGOs with the bias of ANSAF, UCS and HAWA. The study used Dar es Salaam as the case study employing the case study research design with a sample size of 30. Data were gathered through interviews and semi-structured questionnaires and analysed through content analysis for qualitative data. Quantitative data were analysed through simple descriptive statistics. This study aims to examine the mechanisms selected NGOs employ to instil accountability in Tanzania. The study found that the selected NGOs apply various accountability mechanisms, while the most used one is performance assessment based on a short-term basis, followed by disclosure of funding sources. The study concludes that upward and downward accountabilities are overly complex phenomena in actual practice. Thus, NGOs need a proper dedicated balance between the two.
... Oxford, Elsevier JAI. 27 Lempert, David (2015): A Quick Indicator of Effectiveness of "Capacity Building" Intitiatives of NGOs and International Organizations. European Journal of Government and Economics, kialakított vagy megerősített nemzeti/intézményi/szervezeti kapacitás alatt". ...
... Bár általánosságban az adminisztratív kapacitást az eredményes közpolitika-alkotás legfontosabb előfeltételének, így a jó kormányzás egyik fő összetevőjének tartják, körülhatárolása valójában problematikus mind a gyakorlati színtéren, mind a tudományos vizsgálódás területén. Különböző paradigmák csapnak össze, nemzetközi indikátorok születnek szép számmal, de nincs teljes egyetértés abban, hogy miben is áll vagy bukik az adminisztratív 43 Hammerschmid, Gerhard -Stimac, Vid -Wegrich, Kai (2013) Lempert, David (2015): A Quick Indicator of Effectiveness of "Capacity Builiding" Intitiatives of NGOs and International Organizations. European Journal of Government and Economics, kapacitás, és hogyan mérjük mindezt. ...
... 'Development' agencies appear to enforce approaches that assure this rather than those that follow European patterns of savings, investment and taxation. The goal appears to be to transfer moneys to government officials to purchase their loyalty so as to keep access to raw materials and cheap labor, rather than to welcome innovation and competition (Lempert 2015). ...
... Under this Declaration, it would be easy to consider many of the misuses of funds in "capacity building" projects, for example, as efforts to buy influence with officials in developing countries, which is an act specifically criminalized under the Declaration. 85 Bribery, under most country laws, is very well-defined and follows the definition of offering something of value to influence a public official or someone with a legal responsibility. But most countries only use bribery laws as means of protecting (or creating the illusion of protecting) good governance in their own countries rather than for protecting the sovereignty and governance of other countries. ...
This article presents an overview of the first legal treatise on international development law, summarizing the codification of international law that the author has developed to hold donors and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in international development to their own (international and legal and professional) standards and demonstrating how these standards can be legally enforceable. The article presents, together, 13 legal tools (codification of the essential compliance and performance elements in "international development") recently published elsewhere, demonstrating how these codification tools relate to each other and how they can be used together in a single body of law that can be actionable both internationally and domestically. The piece places this series of codifications into the framework context of those international and domestic laws that can be used to enforce them and also notes the supporting professional infrastructure for legal enforcement and changes in international legal culture, such as codes of professional responsibility and legal challenges to education in fields related to development that may be in violation of international law (such as economics), that are necessary for effective enforcement.
... Capacity building is largely used to transfer funds for the purchase of government bureaucrats or for the use of dependent civil society organizations to serve the interests of donor countries. This indicator was peer reviewed by a journal in public administration and economics (Lempert, 2015b). Measure (Democracy, Rights, Market Interventions) Democratization. ...
Background & Purpose: This article summarizes and adds to the tools and infrastructure that the author has developed to hold donors and NGOs in international development to their own international, legal and professional standards, following a call in 2008 for organizations to find objective ways to hold those organizations to compliance with international law and professional principles.
Setting: Global.
Intervention: Not applicable.
Research Design: The article presents 12 indicator tools (in the form of legal elements tests) recently published elsewhere and a new litmus test tool presented here for the first time for quick evaluations of projects using an inductive approach (looking at project logic), explaining how these tools relate to each other and how they can be used together.
After introducing these indicators, the piece then compiles and summarizes the results for several types of organizations to reveal an overall picture of which donors and NGOs are failing, which are succeeding, and what this now objectively verifies is happening in the world of international development.
Data Collection and Analysis: Not applicable.
Findings: The piece offers some reflections on the world that we live in where international standards and universal principles are not applied, where legal codifications for international development are not enforced, and where current international development approaches are leading to unsustainability, conflict, and homogenization (suppression of human diversity and adaptation) that the standards were designed to help avoid. The author’s approaches, overall, offer the larger blueprint for an infrastructure of “development” work to promote universal legal principles, as well as a larger set of reforms for changes in social and political institutions and systems in the developed world for making these changes a reality.
Keywords: sustainability, dependency, democracy, development, aid, capacity building, international relations, international law, donors, UNDP, World Bank, European Commission, NGOs, foundations.
In 2015, the United Nations agreed on seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These SDGs are not legally binding and lack strict enforcement mechanisms. International organizations that seek to implement these goals therefore rely on soft tools to influence governments and other actors, which is often described as “orchestration.” This article focuses on regional governance and studies the yet unexplored role of the five UN Regional Commissions. These commissions seek to link the global ambitions of the SDGs with regional actors, contexts, and priorities. Drawing on extensive document analysis and a series of semistructured expert interviews, the article analyzes the orchestration efforts of all five Regional Commissions, focusing on agenda setting, coordination, and support. It concludes that instead of a unified orchestrating role, Regional Commissions play in practice a balancing role for agenda setting, a sharing role when it comes to coordination, and a conforming role in terms of support.
