Document Library

Key Text Measuring Progress in Stabilisation and Reconstruction

Author: Craig Cohen
Date: 2006
Size: 15 pages (2.26 MB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

Measuring progress is essential to the success of stabilisation and reconstruction efforts. This report, published by the United States Institute of Peace, examines the shortcomings of current processes, including the tendency to measure implementation rather than impact. Proper assessment tools and reliable measures of progress are needed to enable policymakers to take stock of the challenges before intervening and to continuously track the progress of their efforts towards stabilisation. Political will is also essential to ensure leadership and cooperation across organisational boundaries.

In the past, stabilisation and reconstruction operations have been hindered by unrealistic time-frames, insufficient resources and constrained authorities, as well as inadequate initial analysis that failed to take account of the key drivers of conflict and instability. Furthermore, individual agencies have tended to measure progress on the basis of their success in implementing programmes rather than on the basis of outcomes that are essential to long-term peace and stability.

The establishment of a system of metrics, or measureable indicators of progress, is key to the success of stabilisation and reconstruction operations. This would allow policymakers to identify key challenges in the planning stages, to determine achievements over time, and to make changes mid-course as necessary.

Measuring progress requires a process of initial analysis and goal-setting, followed by the identification of core outcomes, central tasks, and measurable indicators.
Initial analysis should focus on the root causes of conflict and the strategies of intervening actors. Accurate baseline information should guide the establishment of mission goals and help to determine the level of international resources and commitment required.
Progress should be measured on the basis of outcomes – in particular, the ability to reduce the root causes of violent conflict in a society and to build local and state capacity to sustain peace.
Indicators should draw on a mixture of appropriate data sources, including quantitative and qualitative data (such as local perceptions of progress).

A number of challenges to developing standards for measuring progress remain including the politicisation of metrics reporting and design, ensuring buy-in from senior leaders and staff, and collecting reliable information. Specific recommendations aimed at enhancing the capacity of policymakers – especially the US government – to measure progress include:

Invest in developing capacity to measure progress in all stabilisation and reconstruction operations. Additional work is required to develop a more comprehensive set of indicators for initial baseline assessments and measures of progress for the core outcomes that underpin stabilisation and reconstruction.
Ensure that all measures used to assess progress are public and transparent. An internal metrics office that is linked to mission planning should be involved in the task of measuring progress and work in collaboration with external actors to guarantee objectivity.
Allocate sufficient resources to measure progress at all stages of an intervention and integrate results into overall planning processes.

Access full text: available online

Source: Cohen, C., 2006, 'Measuring Progress in Stabilisation and Reconstruction', USIP Special Report, United States Institute of Peace, Washington, DC
Organisation: United States Institute of Peace (USIP), http://www.usip.org