변화이론의 개념과 개발협력 적용에 대한 비판적 소고

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to critically examine the Theory of Change (ToC)’s strengths and weaknesses of the concept and its application, which has recently been actively applied by multilateral and bilateral organizations, civil society, and various foundations in Korea. The article is to provide epistemological, conceptual, and methodological implications for the development of cooperation policies and practices.
 Originality: This study has significance in comprehensively examining the concept and problems of this approach, going beyond the growing interest in change theory, which has recently received a lot of attention from domestic development cooperation agencies and evaluation practitioners in Korea. In particular, it is intended to provide a thorough academic and methodological review at the initial stage of institutionalization so that the tools of development cooperation strategy and program establishment and evaluation developed in the West are not applied uncritically to domestic and international projects of Korea.
 Methodology: This paper first examines the social constructivist position of change theory compared to positivist and interpretative/transformative evaluation methods in various evaluation paradigms and flows. Recent confusions and challenges to the theory of change expressed in the literature and seminars collected over 12 months and the five related methodological workshops were identified based on (i) Program Theory, (ii) Research Methods, (i) Vision of Development Cooperation Activities The analysis was divided into epistemology and value.
 Result: The theory of change, which has been actively applied in the UK and the United States has not only been applied to development cooperation evaluation, but has been widely used in education, health, social protection, water and sanitation, community development and environment. This study found that first, in regards to program theory, ToC clearly is a bridge that can most effectively materialize when clarifiers context, and assumption in discussing how to induce intended change in a program theory. Second, in the methodological aspect, ToC was the most instrumental in program-level interventions, thematic and cluster strategy development, and evaluation, rather than a small-scale project type evaluation. There were a series of challenges found such as a lack of clear and technically poor logic that occurs when expert verification is absent, the qualitative difference in the composition of the theory of change according to the beliefs and capabilities of the facilitator, and the limitations of persuading donors compared to evaluation based on rigors empirical analysis. Third, in terms of epistemological perspectives on the evaluation, the theory of change is not simply expanded in order to replace PDM in Korea but is used to comprehensively visualized to promote social change and social change in regards to results, context, and pathways of social change. Based on the value and belief that it can be used as a tool and approach for innovation in development cooperation, ToC in Korea has numerous potentials for serving its purpose in both public and non-profit fields.
 Conclusions and Implication: ToC as the 'Big T' and 'Small T' approach suggested in this paper offers various conceptual and practical strengths to be applied to the policies, strategies, guidelines, and methodologies as new development cooperation for Korea’s international development. In order for the ToC approach to be applied in Korea's development cooperation as a new approach and method, active conceptual and methodological discussion in a critical manner is needed at the beginning of such adaptation. It is hoped that this approach will not be institutionalized in a hurry by limiting it to new tools.