can a common analytical framework for donors work?if yes how?how can it work?if no why?

Question

is it possible to have a common analytical framework, a framework that establishes a common understanding on what is important, that establishes a common baseline and monitoring progress and as a basis for resource allocation. Is this really possible considering the differences in needs of fragile states and developing countries, is it possible to have a one size fits all kind of framework/ approach to tackle development/donor/funding related issues. If yes what will happen to all the other approaches being currently used? And what other supporting factors can you give to support a common framework to be established?

Answer 1

A brief answer to your question is NO.

Since different people have different views of what is important, there is no single framework for making decisions on doing 'good' works.

For example, about 20% of American think that abortion should be available for any female at anytime during her pregnancy for any reason she chooses. About 20% think that any abortion for any reason should be prohibited.

The remaining 60% feel that some abortions should be allowed sometimes.

Clearly, the framework for the first two groups are very different and will never achieve a single framework.

Answer 2

In an ideal world, democracy is an excellent framework on which to build a society.

I can't see how the freedoms that democracy provide would not be good for any country, new or old.

But you must remember that any Government is only as strong as it's people make it. If we don't participate in Government, then it will not work.

Answer 3

SPLATT is right your 'common analytical framework' can't work because it can't exist. Someone once said, if two people agree on everything, one of them is unnecessary. Your 'common analytical framework' literally requires everyone to agree on nearly everything.