Logical frameworks
The use and abuse of the logical framework approach
An alternative approach to the conventional logical framework approach (LFA)
Authors:
O. Bakewell; A. Garbutt
Publisher:
Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency , 2005
This paper outlines current views of NGOs on the logical framework approach (LFA) and the ways in which they use it. The authors note that there is disquiet among NGOs about the central place of the LFA in development programming and about the prospect of abandoning it. Despite the flaws of the LFA in its use of a linear model where inputs cause a set of predictable outcomes, the authors note that alternatives appear to be limited. The authors therefore suggest a model, which takes advantage of the strengths of the LFA, while avoiding its weaknesses. Some of the logic and ability to show progress should remain, while rigid instruments, which lock actors into inappropriate courses of action should be avoided.
Some ideas for moving forward offered by the authors include:
- when thinking though the design of development initiatives, initial consensus from the various stakeholders is required about the current situation and the desired future situation, outlining the overall goal of the intervention
- participatory approaches should be used to establish how the goals will be reached
- the linear mode of thinking when planning the project - the goal, objectives, outputs and activities - must be challenged.
The authors suggest a model where focus in put on achieving consensus around the initial activities. As the project unfolds, it needs to respond, change its theory and revise its expectations. The authors therefore argue that emphasis should be on setting up systems for monitoring the impacts of the project as it unfolds, changing directions accordingly and monitoring those changes in direction. The responsibility of NGOs receiving donor funds would then be to explain the initial direction, what steps were taken and the changes in direction, and how these steps relate to the overall goal. While this approach is open for learning, it ensures that the project moves towards a goal.
The authors recognise that this model requires a change in the incentive system used by donors. Rather than criticising NGOs that carry out activities that fail to contribute to the goal, their sanctions should be reserved to those that fail to learn from this experience and carry on regardless. Donors must also move away from the notion that predetermined outcomes can be expected from a project.
