Current MEL frameworks and practices aim to be as objective and power neutral as possible. Existing approaches such as participatory MEL and community-led evaluations are all bold attempts to ensure MEL is decentralised and democratized.
However, MEL is still replete with longstanding practices and behaviours that reinforce unequal power dynamics – from tools, methods, decisions about what, when, and who to monitor and evaluate, and even how change is envisioned and defined.
In another article, I challenged some of the unhealthy practices by proposing ‘Reciprocal MEL’ as a nascent approach for reshaping power dynamics. Conceptually, it draws inspiration from progressive funding but offers more than just local actors crafting terms of reference. It aims to overturn the traditional donor–recipient, top-down model.
In this emerging concept, local actors take the lead in shaping the MEL process using partnership building as a starting point. They define the process including the challenge, the solution, the desired partner(s) and the resources needed. They then invite partners in the global aid marketplace to apply, outlining their suitability and alignment with the locally set MEL mechanisms. By letting the local actors shape the process, this model curbs the paternalistic accountability ingrained in conventional systems, asserts the agency and solutions of these actors while upending the established donor-centric model by placing leadership in the hands of local actors.
Strengths of the approach
A key strength of this approach is each community’s inherent understanding of MEL, a diversity in cultural perspectives and the premium on local knowledge, traditional wisdom and frameworks. It promotes epistemic pluralism by decolonizing metrics as it incorporates indigenous knowledge and community-based practices and systems such as storytelling, into instruments of MEL.
By shifting from donor-driven metrics to MEL practices and approaches that reflect local values, priorities, and systems, we can better align MEL with the broader goal of redistributing power in international development. Furthermore, the common narrative of ‘local undercapacity’ becomes less relevant, as this emerging approach empowers communities to lead their own MEL processes, minimizing dependency on external actors and rigid, standardized frameworks.
MEL, in this context, becomes a decentralized, two-way process between partners. By viewing MEL as reciprocal, donors and their partners can learn from the communities, rather than imposing external frameworks. Local communities can define their own parameters, enabling funders to embrace new ideas and approaches that can be globally disseminated.
What does the approach require?
To implement this approach, local actors must assume significant responsibility, while northern partners provide support. For far too long, the Global South has remained reactive rather than proactive in shaping global development agenda. Given the importance of funding and its critical role in shaping power dynamics, current arrangements must change. Southern partners need to enhance their local resource mobilisation potential to gain greater leverage in negotiations. Additionally, the global aid marketplace must acknowledge all resources, financial and non-financial, as equally important in the context of partnerships.
Furthermore, southern actors and communities should actively promote the development of indigenous approaches, models, and tools that are culturally and scientifically appropriate. [1] In this regard, northern partners should play a supportive role by acknowledging and recognising these locally driven innovations, offering technical and financial support to test and refine them, and facilitating their broader integration into global development practices.
The role of northern partners
In this regard, it is refreshing to acknowledge North-South initiatives like the Reimagining the INGO (RINGO). RINGO has developed various prototypes to reimagine power structures within the development ecosystem. While some of these show promise, many of these concepts are yet to be thoroughly tested. To achieve their potential, experimentation is required. A thorough process of testing these ideas, improving them through trial and error, and adjusting to local context is important.
This is perhaps, where northern partners like Fingo’s leadership and membership come in to provide the ‘encouraged funding’ for their activation and scalability. [2] Fingo and its members can host ideation workshops with their local partners to gauge appetite, discuss and refine the approach. Furthermore, they can invest in pilot projects that will generate ideas and lessons that can be incorporated into institutional policies, MEL and funding systems.
The journey toward truly shifting the power in MEL is long and winding. To create meaningful change, the ecosystem must transition from a transactional one to a relational one – one that prioritizes solutions of all its stakeholders. Local partners should lead the change, with the ecosystem solidly behind them.
As with any idea, setbacks and lesson learning are inevitable – but after all, what is monitoring and evaluation without learning, reflecting and journeying together?
[1] In this brief blog article, I explored how traditional African folklore, and storytelling can serve as valuable tools for monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL).
[2] “Encouraged funding” here refers to financial support that embraces a higher tolerance for risk, enabling investment in innovative, emerging, or underfunded areas. Unlike risk-averse funding, which prioritizes proven models and guaranteed outcomes, encouraged funding is more flexible, adaptive, and willing to experiment with new approaches, recognizing that impactful change often requires taking strategic risks.