| Popis: |
Bureaucratic management practices increasingly dominate global development and global public health systems. The contemporary approach to managing development programs is a 'results-based', 'New Public Management', which focuses on the measurement of targets, and a linear logic from 'input' to 'impact'. There has been little attention to the experience of the 'frontline' workers of such management systems, which appear to be designed from a donor, rather than from a worker point of view. The possibility of more participatory or empowering Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) methods has received little attention. India' s response to its HIV epidemic has emerged through government and private philanthropy channels, both increasingly adopting approaches of New Public Management. This thesis is concerned with M&E practices in the context of HIV prevention interventions in India. While the literature contains numerous reports of evaluations of interventions in this context, there is no literature which reflects on or problematizes the actual practices of monitoring and evaluation, and how these practices have effects on the ground. Critical development literature and theory highlight the discrepancies which often exist between ideal policies and their actual implementation on the ground. This thesis draws on community psychology, practice theories, and Alvesson and Spicer's (2012) concept of an 'economy of persuasion', to understand the 'mess', particularly the unintended consequences that come about at the interface between bureaucratically-rational M&E processes and complex humanintervention practices. |
