Social Change Theory

1597 Words7 Pages
The current practice of theories of change emerged from both evaluation and informed social practice. (Vogel, 2012), from the evaluation perspective it grew out of the traditional log frame, which increasingly was not sufficient to explain project logic for complex programmes. From the social practice, perspective there was increased debate on how development and social change occurs with development practitioners searching for tools to attempt to consciously reflect on the underlying theories for development practice (Craig valters 2014) A theory of change can be a helpful tool for developing solutions to complex social problems. At its most basic, a theory of change explains how a group of early and intermediate accomplishments sets the…show more content…
There are several critiques of the log frame approach, as they tend to over emphasize only outcome indicators without looking at what really causes the change Its either a log frame or theory of change, for ACT health it made more sense to use the Theory of change” former GOAL Uganda M&E coordinator In conclusion the three major issues influenced the development and adoption of the Theory of change approach which were Staff’s interest and capacity to develop the TOC; ACT health itself was complex and needed something more than a log frame; and finally the development industry was just learning about the TOC and GU management were open to learning and engaging with it. 2.5.1. The Process of development The ACT health theory of change was developed and refined over few months, informed by a very robust literature review on good governance, accountability and demand –side development programmes. This same literature influenced and recommended the use theory of change rather than a logical…show more content…
One may argue that both the consultative workshops and the validation meeting with the selected implementation partners was participatory enough, however it should also be noted that the power relations between the implementing partners and GU/ external consultant did discourage critical reflections and discussions as GU was viewed as the “donor”, in addition the implementing partners did not have any prior experiences implementing social accountability programmes and were also new to the theories of change

More about Social Change Theory

Open Document