Understanding Theory of Change in International Development: A Review of Existing Knowledge

This document provides a comprehensive review of concepts and debates within the “Theory of Change” (ToC) literature, focusing on international development. The paper examines various definitions, purposes, and critiques of ToC, highlighting the importance of clarity in terminology and the potential for both internal and external drivers. This resource is particularly valuable for program designers, evaluators, and policy makers seeking to understand and apply ToC approaches effectively.

Key Insights

Confusion Surrounding Theory of Change

There is a basic problem that different organisations are using the term ToC to mean very different things. If there is no consensus on how to define ToC and it has endless variations in terms of style and content, how can anybody successfully grapple with it? (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 5). Critics have argued that the failure of ToC proponents to tie it down to any tangible meaning has led people to make unrealistic promises on its behalf. If ToC is to be more than another development ‘fuzzword’, then greater clarity is needed on a number of levels, starting with common terminology, use and expectations of ToC approaches.

Varying Purposes of Theory of Change

ToC approaches can be understood across a continuum. At the far left end is a very technical understanding of ToC representing its use as a precise planning tool, most likely as an extension of the ‘assumptions’ box in a logframe. In the middle is ToC thinking’ – suggested by many as the key element of a ToC process – understood as a less formal, often implicit, use as a ‘way of thinking’ about how a project is expected to work. On the far right side is an approach to ToC which emphasizes the need for practitioners to develop ‘political literacy’, a complex and nuanced understanding of how change happens, allowing them to respond to unpredictable events (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 5).

Types of Theory of Change

1. Evaluative or formative: Evaluation focused theory of change can also be prospective (designed from the beginning of a programme) or retrospective (carried out at the time of the evaluation to understand what has underpinned practice) (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 9).
2. Explanatory or exploratory: Some approaches seek to make explicit – to explain – the existing theory for an organisation or programme in order to then learn and test whether it works. Others some set out to explore their theory from the outset without holding preconceptions (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 9).
3. Linear or complex: Some seek to lay out a very specific set of steps of cause and effect that can be tested at each level; while others seek to think about and represent theory of change from a more systemic or network perspective that reflects the complexity of change processes and shows the actors, chains, linkages and learning loops (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 9).

Tension Between Externally-Imposed and Internally-Driven Processes

While some organisations may internally opt to undertake ToCs as a way to better rationalise their efforts, others may simply complete the process in response to donor demands. This can be problematic, as the need to use ToC to “sell” a programme may privilege the inclusion of donor requirements or politically preferable approaches in the ToC and in wider project planning. These approaches may ultimately supersede the concerns of the implementing organisation and/or the needs of the programme’s intended beneficiaries (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 7).

The Need For Power Analysis

Eyeben et al. reinforce this point, noting that “any model of societal change is political and value-laden” and should “understand and relate to the power relations” therein (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 15). Though perhaps uncomfortable at times, grasping the reality of the political dimensions of development may ultimately allow for more effective programming that is more firmly grounded in local realities.

Key Statistics & Data

• 246: Total number of documents initially accessed for the review (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 2).
• 48: Number of documents containing guidance or substantial discussion of ToC that were reviewed (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 2).

Methodology

This review covers documents from major donors, development agencies and expert practitioners on ToC approaches. The documents were obtained through a mix of systematic internet-based searches and snowballing methods. Key papers identified through personal knowledge of the research team were also included. A question template was developed to draw out information from each document and to ensure consistency across researchers. The broader findings of this paper were also informed by discussions within the JSRP-TAF collaboration, including a two-day workshop in June 2012, where the initial findings of this review were presented and debated with numerous stakeholders.

Implications and Conclusions

This literature review has outlined and analysed current thinking on ToC in the field of international development (Stein & Valters, 2012, p. 15). Prominent concepts and common debates have been identified and critically assessed. Whilst this information may help inform future use of ToC approaches, it has also identified a number of difficulties facing those presented by guidance and other literature on the topic. Key issues for future inquiry are the role of the end-user in the ToC process and the extent to which power analysis informs ToC approaches.