Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Seeming Simplicity of Measurement*

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ethical Questions and International NGOs

Part of the book series: Library of Ethics and Applied Philosophy ((LOET,volume 23))

Abstract

The key issue this chapter tries to address relates to a challenge raised by Keith Horton’s chapter “The Epistemic Problem: Potential Solutions”, this volume in response to Peter Singer’s proposition (1999) that the rich have a moral obligation to assist the world’s poor and therefore should give a reasonable proportion of their income to those agencies whose aim it is to alleviate poverty and suffering. Horton’s challenge is that surely this moral obligation only applies if those in a position to give some of their income in this way have some ability to satisfy themselves that the agency or agencies to which they might give, are able to demonstrate the net effect of their work is good enough to imply that we should give to them. He goes on to argue that it is in fact very difficult for those who are not experts on aid to find out what the effects of aid actually are; this he calls the ‘Epistemic Problem’.

*The trouble with measurement is its seeming simplicity’.~ Author Unknown

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • ALNAP. http://www.alnap.org accessed 1 July 2007.

  • Bonbright, D. 2007. The Changing Face of Accountability. Talk at the International Seminar on Civil Society and Accountability, Montevideo, 16 Apr.

    Google Scholar 

  • BOND. 2006. A BOND Approach to Quality in Non-Governmental Organisations: Putting Beneficiaries First. Report by Keystone and Account Ability for the British Overseas NGOs for Development (BOND).

    Google Scholar 

  • Braden, S.. 1998. Video for Development a Casebook from Vietnam. Oxford: Oxfam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgis, T. and S. Zadek. 2006. Reinventing Accountability for the 21st Century, Account Ability, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • California Endowment. 2005. The Challenge of Assessing Policy and Advocacy Activities: Strategies for a Prospective Evaluation Approach. Los Angeles, CA: The California Endowment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J. and A. Wameyo. 2001. Monitoring and Evaluating Advocacy: A Scoping Study. Lima: Preval, http://www.preval.org/documentos/00545.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury, N., C. Finlay-Notman, and I. Hovland. 2006. CSO Capacity for Policy Engagement: Lessons Learned from the CSPP Consultations in Africa, Asia and Latin America, Working Paper 272, Overseas Development Institute, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, S., M. Bhatia, M. Evans, R. Fanthorpe, J. Goodhand, and J. Stephen. 2002. Politically Informed Humanitarian Programming: Using a Political Economy Approach, HPN Paper 41. London: Overseas Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooperrider, D. http://appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/. Accessed 1 July 2007.

  • Crawford, P. 2005. Aiding Aid: a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework to Enhance International Aid Effectiveness. PhD thesis, University of Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, D.. 1996. Hunger, capability and development. In World Hunger and Moral Obligation, eds. A. William and L. Hugh. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, NJ, place, reprinted in Hugh Lafollette (ed.) Ethics in Practice, Routledge, 2nd Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, R.. 1996. An Evolutionary Approach to Facilitating Organisational Learning: An Experiment by the Christian Commission for Development in Bangladesh. Swansea: Centre for Development Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, R. and J. Dart. 2005. The Most Significant Change’ (MSC) Technique: A Guide to Its Use, MandE News, Cambridge. http://www.mande.co.uk/docs/MSCGuide.htm.

  • Davis, A.. 2007. Concerning Accountability of Humanitarian Action, HPN Paper 58. London: Overseas Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denning, S. http://www.stevedenning.com/LeadersGuide.html. Accessed 1 July 2007.

  • Easterly, W.. 2006. The White Man’s Burden. London: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M.. 1996. International Development NGOs: Legitimacy, Accountability, Regulation and Roles. London: Commission on the Future of the Voluntary Sector.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F.. 2004. State Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galtung, J.. 1969. Violence, peace and peace research. Journal of Peace Research 6(3): 167–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global Voices. http://globalvoicesonline.org/-/human-rights-video/. Accessed 1 July 2007.

  • Goold, E.. 2006. Working with Barriers to Organisational Learning. London: BOND.

    Google Scholar 

  • HAP. http://www.hapinternational.org. Accessed I July 2007.

  • Harmer, A. and J. Mcrae. 2004. Beyond the Continuum: The Changing Role of Aid Policy in Protracted Crises, HPG Report 18. London: Overseas Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilhorst, D.. 2005. Dead letter or living document? Ten years of the code of conduct for disaster relief. Disasters 29(4): 351–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A.. 1970. Exit, Voice, Loyalty: Responses to the Decline in Firms, Organisations and States. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, K.. 2004. Aid and bias. Inquiry 47(6): 545–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R.. 2007. Where anti-Arab prejudice and oil make the difference. Guardian Wednesday 16 May.

    Google Scholar 

  • IFRC. 1994. Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief. Geneva: International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. http://www.ifrc.org/publicat/conduct/code.asp.

    Google Scholar 

  • IFRC. 2003. World Disaster Report 2003. Bloomfield, NJ: Kumarian Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, L., van Tuijl, P. eds. 2006. NGO Accountability: Politics, Principles & Innovations. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, S.-E., T. Kyllonen, S. Ojanpera R. Riddell (1997), Searching for Impact and Methods: NGO Evaluation Synthesis Study. Report prepared for the OECD/DAC Expert Group on Evaluation. Helsinki: Department for International Development Cooperation, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masud, N. and B. Yontcheva. 2005. Does Foreign Aid Reduce Poverty? Empirical Evidence from Nongovernmental and Bilateral Aid, IMF working paper WP/05/100, 20. Washington, DC: IMF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medecin Sans Frontieres. http://www.msf.ca/blogs/. Accessed 1 July 2007.

  • Monk, P. 2007. Fantasy, Paranoia, Enthusiasm and Reality. Griffith Review Ed 16:Unintended Consequences.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Audit Office. 2006. Working with Non-Governmental and other Civil Society Organisations to Promote Development. London: Department for International Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, P. and J. Wheeler. 2006. Rights, Resources and the Politics of Accountability. London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • One World Trust. 2006. Global Accountability Report. London: One World Trust. http://www.oneworldtrust.org/?display=index_2006.

  • Oxfam GB. 2007. Oxfam Blogs. Oxford: Oxfam. http://www.oxfam.org.uk/applications/blogs/. Accessed 1 July 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M.. 1997. Utilization-Focused Evaluation: The New Century Text, 3rd edn. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J.. 1994. Alternative systems of inquiry for a sustainable agriculture. IDS Bulletin 25(2): 37–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riddell, R.. 1984. Foreign Aid Reconsidered. London: James Currey/Overseas Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riddell, R. 1990. Judging Success: Evaluating NGO Approaches to Alleviating Poverty in Developing Countries, Working Paper No. 37, Overseas Development Institute, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Riddell, R.. 2007. Does Foreign Aid Really Work? Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riddell, R.C. and M. Robinson 1992. The Impact of NGO Poverty Alleviating Projects: Results of the Case Studies. Working Paper No.68, Overseas Development Institute, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roche, C.. 1999. Impact Assessment for Development Agencies. Oxford: Oxfam GB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roche, C., N. Kasynathan, and P. Gowthaman. 2005. Bottom-up Accountability and the Tsunami. Paper prepared for the International Conference on Engaging Communities, Brisbane, 14–17 Aug.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roche, C. and L. Kelly. 2003. Evaluating the Performance of Development Agencies: Perspectives from NGO Experience. Paper for World Bank Conference on Evaluating Effectiveness; Challenges and the Way Forward

    Google Scholar 

  • SPHERE. 2004. Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response. http://www.sphereproject.org/content/view/27/84/lang,English/. Accessed 1 July 2007.

  • Singer, P. 1999. The Singer Solution to World Poverty, http://people.brandeis.edu/˜teuber/singermag.html. Accessed 13 June 2007.

  • Slim, H.. 1997. Doing the right thing. Disasters 21(3): 244–257, Sep.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slim, H.. 2003. Chapter 1 . In World Disasters Report 2003. Bloomfield, NJ: IFRC, Kumarian Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slim, H. 2005. Idealism and Realism in Humanitarian Action. Talks given at the ACFID Humanitarian Forum, Canberra, 5 Oct.

    Google Scholar 

  • Telford, J., J. Cosgrave, and R. Houghton. 2006. Joint Evaluation of the International Response to the Indian Ocean Tsunami: Synthesis Report. London: Tsunami Evaluation Coalition, http://www.tsunami-evaluation.org/NR/rdonlyres/0B60502D-167D-478C-82DF-1961FCB48A8A/0/ExSum.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaux, T. 2002. The Selfish Altruist: Relief Work in War Famine and War. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, T. and J. Chapman. 2006. An Investigation into the Reality Behind NGO Rhetoric of Downward Accountability. Oxford: INTRAC, http://www.ngopractice.org/docs/INTRACpaper.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. 2003. Toward Country-Led Development: A Multi-Partner Evaluation of the Comprehensive Development Framework, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oxfam Australia, Carlton, VIC, Australia

    Chris Roche

Authors
  1. Chris Roche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Roche .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fac. Arts, School of English Literatures,, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia

    Keith Horton

  2. Oxfam Australia, Leicester Street 132, Carlton, 3053, Australia

    Chris Roche

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Roche, C. (2010). The Seeming Simplicity of Measurement* . In: Horton, K., Roche, C. (eds) Ethical Questions and International NGOs. Library of Ethics and Applied Philosophy, vol 23. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8592-4_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation