Rights-Based Approach to Development (RBA)

The 2003 InterAction paper, An Introduction to the Concept of Rights-Based Approach to Development clarifies the origins of the rights-based approach to development (RBA), proposes a working definition of human rights-based programming in development, and offers a case study showing that a rights-based approach makes a real difference and constitutes a marked improvement over traditional programming. A brief overview of RBA, adapted from the paper, is offered below.

Understanding the Rights-Based Approach to Development

Rights-based programming, while building on the strengths of traditional programming, is a new way of approaching development and not merely a change in terminology. The Secretary-General of the United Nations has ordered the entire UN system to integrate or “mainstream” human rights in all its work. Many bilateral donors have made rights-based development programming a priority. Likewise, international NGOs like CARE and Oxfam have adopted rights-based programming in their work.

Various definitions of RBA exist (click the link to read the perspectives of various aid agencies, international organizations, NGOs, CSOs, and writers). A group of development practitioners in South Asia offers one of the more succinct and lucid definitions:

“A rights-based approach is founded on the conviction that each and every human being, by virtue of being human, is a holder of rights. A right entails an obligation on the part of the government to respect, promote, protect, and fulfill it. The legal and normative character of rights and the associated governmental obligations are based on international human rights treaties and other standards, as well as on national constitutional human rights provisions. Thus a rights-based approach involves not charity or simple economic development, but a process of enabling and empowering those not enjoying their ESC [economic, social and cultural] rights to claim their rights.”

The International Bill of Human Rights defines and establishes the human rights enjoyed by everyone regardless of culture, religion, gender or stage of economic development. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948 and subsequently re-affirmed in 1993, along with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights constitute the International Bill of Rights. Over 160 countries have ratified one or both of these Covenants, so they are binding law in most of the world. Other treaties crucial to development practitioners include the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention Eliminating All Forms of Discrimination against Women, and the Convention against Racial Discrimination, all of which have been ratified by most states in the world.

Ratifying these treaties is not an empty or symbolic act. By requiring states to ensure that their laws are fully consistent with the treaties, they consistently introduce the principles of equality, non-discrimination, transparency, and accountability into national and local law, giving rights holders a solid legal basis upon which to make their claims. Former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson emphasized that “a human rights approach adds value because it provides a normative framework of obligations that has legal power to render governments accountable” (speech to World Summit, Johannesburg, August 28, 2002).

That the rights-based approach focuses on economic, social and cultural rights (ESCR) is not surprising, given the nature of development work and its focus on health care, housing, education, access to credit, labor and food. For far too long, human rights work has been equated with only civil and political rights. These essential rights remain necessary components of RBA, but without ESCR, they present a sadly incomplete picture. The rights-based approach highlights economic, social, cultural, civic and political rights; "all rights for all" was Mary Robinson's mantra.

The growing international legal system sets the context for RBA by placing human rights laws at the center of development practice. Under this system, the population (or “rights holders”) have the right to demand from the “duty-bearer,” which is often the state, that it meets its obligations under international law to respect, protect and fulfill people’s rights. (The duty bearer can also be a private entity such as a corporation, a family, or a local government.)

NGOs have long valued their neutrality and nonpartisanship. However, this attention to being apolitical ignores the political nature of development interventions, which inherently influence the balance of power. Utilizing a rights-based approach requires NGOs to engage more fully on policies and practices which deny the fulfillment of human rights. This can have several implications. First, assessing the level that rights are or are not realized yields a more precise analysis of poverty and its real root causes. Second, development experts can then use the principles of progressive realization and maximum use of available resources to measure and assess outcomes of programs against the international human rights law framework. Third, RBA enhances the ability of both the rights holders to demand their rights that are guaranteed by law and of the duty bearers (state, private entity or individual) to meet their obligations. And fourth, rights-based programming holds accountable all those charged with safeguarding rights—state and non-state actors, public and private, groups and individuals—for any violations. This adds a new and powerful dimension to development work in the 21st century.

Human rights, as espoused in the rights-based approach to development, transform people from being merely “inhabitants” of a territory, dependent on government largesse, into full-fledged citizens of a state, capable of demanding and receiving fulfillment of the full panoply of human rights necessary to live a dignified life. The rights-based approach, it follows, is an evolution in development programming. It “does not require the replacement of traditional planning activities with something completely different. Rather it serves as a means of adding value to those activities through changes in the ways in which they are implemented and the issues they cover.”