Has the Theory of Change established itself as the better alternative to the Logical Framework Approach in development cooperation programmes?

Lisa Ringhofer and Karin Kohlweg
Additional contact information
Lisa Ringhofer: TripleMinds Consultancy Network
Karin Kohlweg: pmeKohlweg Consulting

Progress in Development Studies, 2019, vol. 19, issue 2, 112-122

Abstract: This article critically reflects on two development programme planning methodologies: the dominant Logical Framework Approach (LFA) and the Theory of Change (ToC). It reviews their conceptual origins and outlines their commonalities, differences and challenges in day-to-day development practice. The article claims that while both approaches originate from the same family of programme theory, the LFA has over the years somehow lost its analytic lens to capture social change and become more of a donor-driven performance management tool. The ToC has restored some of these analytical and engagement aspects that the LFA approach was originally designed to elicit, but some of the practical challenges remain. The authors argue for a combined use of both methodologies, if held lightly and approached from a learning and not a compliance perspective.

Keywords: Logical Framework Approach (LFA); Logframe matrix; Theory of Change (ToC); development practice (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1464993418822882 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:prodev:v:19:y:2019:i:2:p:112-122

DOI: 10.1177/1464993418822882

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Progress in Development Studies
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().