Anderson, Ed 2008. "Using quantitative methods to monitor government obligations in terms of the rights to health and education".
- Objective: To measure the fulfillment of health and education rights obligations within a country.
- Key characteristics: Focused on measuring maximum available resources and progressive realization in relation to rights to health and education; ex-post analysis; obligation to fulfill; uses process indicators; designed for civil society organizations (CSO) or human rights activists with economic backgrounds.
- Brief summary: Provides a methodology that identifies, and then costs, an action which a government is not currently taking, but should be taking to improve access to goods and services, in order to improve the realization of the rights to health and education. The methodology focuses on government efforts (process indicators), both in how they affect human rights outcomes and what needs to be done to improve on these efforts. Proposes an assessment in three steps: 1. Analyze what government is currently doing and what else it could be doing; 2. Conduct a cost analysis of the additional steps a government could take; 3. Assess negative effects of extra revenue raising to undertake this action to ensure that this does not offset positive intended effects of greater fulfillment of rights - if it does not, then lack of resources is an unacceptable excuse for the failure to take this further action and for the lack of progressive realization.
- Best used for: To analyze government efforts so that the user can determine whether lack of fulfillment is due to lack of political will or to other factors constraining duty-bearer action. Can be adapted to measure other rights.
- Data required: Up-to-date, reliable and representative data, especially household surveys.
- Tested?: Tested in South Africa case study on water (COHRE).
- Possible disadvantages: Highly mathematical, which may be difficult for the average CSO. There is dependency on the availability of up-to-date, reliable and representative data needed for measuring the variable and indicators - are there possibilities to use this methodology in light of missing data?
- Going forward: Future plans to examine the relationships that have been simplified in order to make this tool usable. For example, further debate in human rights world as to how to decide when minimum essential levels have been attained. Also, there could be development of more complex models to test the relationships between health and education, government expenditure and other intermediary variables used in this methodology, e.g. supply of trained health and education workers.
- Complementary tools: This tool could be used in conjunction with Fukuda-Parr et al for a more general picture of ESCR fulfillment in a country. Or its conceptual basis could be used in conjunction with e.g the People's Health Movement Guide, which has simplified step-by-step instructions for assessing a government's fulfillment of the right to health, for on the ground human rights activists.