Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Potential of the Human Rights-Based Approach for the Evolution of the United Nations as a System

  • Published:
Human Rights Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The United Nations (UN), facing increasingly intense challenges in the fulfillment of its mission, also harbors the potential for enhanced effectiveness, relevance, and legitimacy in the form of the human rights-based approach. The human rights-based approach (HRBA) is one model for translating the organization’s values into a more adaptive, inclusive, dynamic, and responsive system of processes and outcomes. In the arena of politics, its meeting with a meaningful degree of receptiveness could signal a growing acceptance of the validity of structural approaches to development and other issues despite traditional defensive positions on human rights. Application of the HRBA in programming is leading to greater appreciation for addressing core disparities and promoting empowerment for sustainable outcomes. It is also cultivating new qualities in development practitioners, advancing creativity, openness and responsiveness in organizational culture. In feeding its evolution in this way, the UN as a system has the potential for deeper, longer-term mission fulfillment and thus ensuring its viability.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a full depiction of the UN system of entities and articulation of related acronyms, please see the official UN chart in the Annex.

  2. See Senge (1990), The Fifth Discipline—The Art and Practice of The Learning Organization and Bánáthy (2000), Guided Evolution of Society: A Systems View (Contemporary Systems Thinking).

  3. Taken from the website of the UN Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and the Small Island Developing States (http://www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/ohrlls/cca_undaf_prsp.htm)

  4. See also the UNDG (2008) Guidelines for UN Country Teams On Preparing A CCA And UNDAF, UNDG and Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2006; Frequently Asked Questions On A Human Rights-Based Approach To Development Cooperation

  5. See Uvin (2004), Human Rights and Development

  6. For a full treatment of these political positions and counter arguments on the basis, inter alia, of the human rights obligations of the United Nations, of the invalidity of conditionality concerns, of decision-making processes that ensure government ownership, see Darrow and Arbour (2009), The Pillar of Glass: Human Rights in the Development Operations of the United Nations. American Journal of International Law, p 446

  7. See OHCHR High Commissioner's Strategic Management Plan 2010–2011: p. 51

  8. See the UN Common Learning Package on HRBA, 2007 (http://hrbaportal.org/?page_id=2204&mod=clp)

  9. See the Action 2 archives and UNCT reports at http://www.undg.org/index.cfm?P=1393.

  10. International Finance Corporation and International Business Leaders Forum, Guide to Human Rights Impact Assessment and Management, accessible at http://www.iblf.org/resources/guides.aspx.

  11. See OHCHR (2005), “Comments on the Concept Note Joint World Bank and IMF Report on Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers—Progress in Implementation 2005 PRS Review” and OHCHR (2006a, b) “Principles And Guidelines For A Human Rights Approach To Poverty Reduction Strategies”.

  12. Under the Action 2 initiative, impact was measured against strengthening the capacity of the UNCT to apply the HRBA to programming, to support national human rights promotion and protection systems, and to create linkages with international human rights mechanisms. Among Action 2 projects, Chile, Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, Russia, Rwanda, and Ukraine registered success with those indicators in their final report; Albania Bahrain, Burundi, Costa Rica, Maldives moderate success to success; moderate success in Colombia and Niger and Tanzania; and success of relevant elements in Afghanistan and Sri Lanka and Vietnam. See the Action 2 archives and UNCT reports at http://www.undg.org/index.cfm?P=1393.

  13. See Action 2 Global Programme (2008), Third Interagency Meeting On Implementing A Human Rights-Based Approach, 1–3 October, Tarrytown, New York, Comparative Review Of Human Rights-Related And Other Relevant Interagency Coordination Mechanisms In The UN System

  14. http://blogs.worldbank.org/africacan/human-rights-and-human-development

  15. Peter Senge notes "Systems thinking also needs the disciplines of building shared vision, mental models, team learning, and personal mastery to realize its potential. Building shared vision fosters a commitment to the long term. Mental models focus on the openness needed to unearth shortcomings in our present ways of seeing the world. Team learning develops the skills of groups of people to look for the larger picture beyond individual perspectives. And personal mastery fosters the personal motivation to continually learn how our actions affect our world" (Senge 1990:12).

References

  • Action 2 Country Mid Term Reports And Final Reports. Available at http://www.undg.org/index.cfm?P=1393

  • Action 2 Global Programme (2008) Comparative Review Of Human Rights-Related And Other Relevant Interagency Coordination Mechanisms In The UN System Third Interagency Meeting On Implementing A Human Rights-Based Approach, 1–3 October, Tarrytown. United Nations, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alston, P. (2005).A Human Rights Perspective on the Millennium Development Goals’, Paper prepared as a contribution to the work of the Millennium Project Task Force on Poverty and Economic Development. United Nations, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alston, P. (2009). Putting Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Back on the Agenda of the United States. Center for Human Rights and Global Justice Working Papers No. 22.

  • Amin, S. (2006). The Millennium Development Goals: A Critique from the South. Monthly Review. Volume 57, Issue 10 (March).

  • Bánáthy, B. (2000). Guided Evolution of Society: A Systems View (Contemporary Systems Thinking). Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • CARE USA and OXFAM America (2008). Rights-Based Approaches: Learning Project. Boston MA and Atlanta GA: OXFAM America and CARE USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darrow, M. (2003). Between Light and Shadow: The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and International Human Rights Law. Portland Oregon: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darrow, M. and Tomas, A. (2005). Power, Capture, and Conflict: A Call for Human Rights Accountability in Development Cooperation. Human Rights Quarterly, Volume 27, Number 2, pp. 471–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darrow, M. and Arbour, L. (2009). The Pillar of Glass: Human Rights in the Development Operations of the United Nations. American Journal of International Law, pp. 446–501.

  • FAO (2006). The Right to Food Guidelines: Information Papers and Case Studies. FAO, Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • German Institute for Human Rights (2010). Promising Practices on the human rights-based approach in German development cooperation. German Institute for Human Rights, GTZ and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, Eschborn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghazi, B.(2005). The IMF, the World Bank Group and the Question of Human Rights. Transnational Publishers, Ardsley, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Group of Twenty Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors (2010). Seoul Development Consensus for Shared Growth. G20 Seoul Summit. Seoul, Republic of Korea November 2010. G20, Seoul.

  • Hochschild, F. (2010). In and above conflict: A Study on leadership in the UN. Center for Humanitarian Dialogue Report. Center for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsui H. (2008). Downside of the Human Rights-Based Approach to Disability in Development. Institute of Development Studies Working Paper, 2/2008. Helsinki University, Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkemann Boesen, J. and Martin, T. (2007). Applying a rights based approach: An inspirational guide for civil society. The Danish Institute for Human Rights, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancet and London International Development Centre Commission (2010). The Millennium Development Goals: a cross-sectoral analysis and principles for goal setting after 2015. The Lancet, published online September 13, 2010.

  • Manjii, F. (1998). The Depoliticisation of Poverty. In D. Eade, ed: Development and Rights. Oxfam, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordgard, J. (2006). Poverty, Human Rights and Implementation of MDGs in Cambodia. Master Thesis. University of Oslo.

  • Norwegian Centre for Human Rights (2002). Learning Together: The challenge of applying a human rights approach to education: Lessons and suggestions from Zambia. Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyamu-Musembi, C. and Cornwall, A. (2004). What is the “rights-based approach” all about? Perspectives from international development agencies. Institute for Development Studies Working Paper, 234.

  • OHCHR (2005). Comments on the Concept Note: Joint World Bank and IMF Report on Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers—Progress in Implementation 2005 PRS Review. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • OHCHR (2006). Principles and Guidelines for a Human Rights Approach to Poverty Reduction Strategies. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • OHCHR (2006). Frequently Asked Questions on a Human Rights-Based Approach To Development Cooperation. OHCHR, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, W. and Bye, V. (2002). From High Principles to Operational Practice: Strengthening OHCHR Capacity to support UN Country Teams to Integrate Human Rights in Development Programming. Report commissioned by OHCHR. OHCHR, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, W. (2004). Review of 2003 CCAs and UNDAFs from Human Rights Perspectives. Report commissioned by OHCHR. OHCHR, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogge T. (2004). The First UN Millennium Development Goal: A Cause for Celebration?. Journal of Human Development, Vol.5, No.3, Nov. 2004.

  • Pogge, T. (2005). World Poverty and Human Rights. Ethics & International Affairs. Volume 19, No. 1.

  • Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline—The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seppänen S. (2005). Possibilities and Challenges of the Human Rights-Based Approach to Development. Hakapaino Oy, Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • UK Interagency Group on Human Rights Based Approaches (2007).London: The UK Interagency Group on Human Rights Based Approaches. UN Common Learning Package on HRBA, 2007. Available at http://hrbaportal.org/?page_id=2204&mod=clp

  • UNDP (2006). Case Study: Applying a HRBA to Municipal Development in Bosnia & Herzegovina. Rights Based Municipal Development Program, RMAP_2006. UNDP.

  • UNDG (2008). Synthesis Of Resident Coordinator Annual Reports 2008, Human Rights Mainstreaming. UNDG, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2006). The Human Rights Based Approach and the United Nations System, Desk study prepared by André Frankovits. UNESCO, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2007). Human Rights-Based Strategies Adopted by UNICEF Laos in the Water and Sanitation Sector: A Sustainable Approach. UNESCO, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2008). Undertaking the Human Rights Based Approach, lessons for policy, planning and programming. Documenting lessons learned for the human rights based approach to programming: An Asia-Pacific Perspective. UNESCO, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNFPA and Harvard School of Public Health Program On International Health And Human Rights, 2008 UNFPA at Work: Six Human Rights Case Studies. UNFPA and Harvard School of Public Health Program on International Health and Human Rights.

  • UNICEF (2004). A Human Rights-Based Approach to Programming for Children and Women in Viet Nam: Key Entry Points & Challenges. UNICEF, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2006). Delivering as One, Report of the Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on UN system wide coherence. United Nations, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN System Staff College (2010). Experiences in Applying Human Rights Based Approaches. UNSSC, Turin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uvin P. (2002). On High Moral Ground: The Incorporation of Human Rights by the Development Enterprise. The Fletcher Journal of Development Studies 17, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uvin P. (2004). Human Rights and Development. Kumarian Press, West Hartford, CT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, T. (2009). What’s Wrong with the United Nations and How to Fix It. Polity press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

 

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Global Vision Institute, 1416 York Avenue, Apt. 3C, New York, NY, 10021, USA

    Alisa Clarke

Authors
  1. Alisa Clarke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alisa Clarke.

Annex

Annex

Fig. 1
figure 1

The United Nations System (See http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/structure/org_chart.shtml for the color version of the chart and http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/structure/pdfs/un_system_chart_sm.pdf for the black and white version of the chart)

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Clarke, A. The Potential of the Human Rights-Based Approach for the Evolution of the United Nations as a System. Hum Rights Rev 13, 225–248 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-011-0212-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-011-0212-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation