Asset 1

Global Go To Think Tank Index (GGTTI) 2020 launched                    111,75 Think Tanks across the world ranked in different categories.                SDPI is ranked 90th among “Top Think Tanks Worldwide (non-US)”.           SDPI stands 11th among Top Think Tanks in South & South East Asia & the Pacific (excluding India).            SDPI notches 33rd position in “Best New Idea or Paradigm Developed by A Think Tank” category.                SDPI remains 42nd in “Best Quality Assurance and Integrity Policies and Procedure” category.              SDPI stands 49th in “Think Tank to Watch in 2020”.            SDPI gets 52nd position among “Best Independent Think Tanks”.                           SDPI becomes 63rd in “Best Advocacy Campaign” category.                   SDPI secures 60th position in “Best Institutional Collaboration Involving Two or More Think Tanks” category.                       SDPI obtains 64th position in “Best Use of Media (Print & Electronic)” category.               SDPI gains 66th position in “Top Environment Policy Tink Tanks” category.                SDPI achieves 76th position in “Think Tanks With Best External Relations/Public Engagement Program” category.                    SDPI notches 99th position in “Top Social Policy Think Tanks”.            SDPI wins 140th position among “Top Domestic Economic Policy Think Tanks”.               SDPI is placed among special non-ranked category of Think Tanks – “Best Policy and Institutional Response to COVID-19”.                                            Owing to COVID-19 outbreak, SDPI staff is working from home from 9am to 5pm five days a week. All our staff members are available on phone, email and/or any other digital/electronic modes of communication during our usual official hours. You can also find all our work related to COVID-19 in orange entries in our publications section below.    The Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) is pleased to announce its Twenty-third Sustainable Development Conference (SDC) from 14 – 17 December 2020 in Islamabad, Pakistan. The overarching theme of this year’s Conference is Sustainable Development in the Times of COVID-19. Read more…       FOOD SECIRITY DASHBOARD: On 4th Nov, SDPI has shared the first prototype of Food Security Dashboard with Dr Moeed Yousaf, the Special Assistant to Prime Minister on  National Security and Economic Outreach in the presence of stakeholders, including Ministry of National Food Security and Research. Provincial and district authorities attended the event in person or through zoom. The dashboard will help the government monitor and regulate the supply chain of essential food commodities.

Number of Downlaods: 21

Published Date: Mar 1, 2010

Contested Aims, Contested Strategies: New Development Paradigm through the lens of the AKRSP(W-114)

Antonia SettleWorking

March  2010


There has been a shift in development
paradigms reflected in the discourse of international funding bodies, from
technocratic aid modalities associated with Washington Consensus models towards
a ‘new development paradigm’ that accompanies post-Washington Consensus
economic prescriptions. This new development paradigm relies increasingly on
NGOs for channeling funds, while granting more space for government regulation
and emphasizing participatory approaches. The new paradigm has produced a
discourse on devolution, participatory development and decentralization. Yet
the new development paradigm has not broken free of the essentially
technocratic approaches that continue to limit both monitoring and evaluation
procedures and the discourse of development at the broader level, resulting in
a gap between policy and practice as well as ill-informed development policy

This paper
undertakes a case study of the Aga Khan Rural Support Program (AKRSP), a rural
development program operating in the North of Pakistan that conforms to the
prescriptions of the new development paradigm and has achieved impressive
accolades, international replication and “remarkable” findings in a number of
World Bank evaluations. The paper seeks to consider this very successful
program beyond the norms of mainstream monitoring and evaluation procedures, to
consider some of the issues raised in the critical literature regarding the new
development paradigm and the larger discourse within which the new paradigm
remains embedded.


The paper raises
a number of issues with regards to the AKRSP, including the role of religion in
sustaining engagement amongst communities and the limits on market functions in
alleviating poverty. These issues are indicative of how mainstream approaches
fail to incorporate important aspects into monitoring and evaluation outcomes
and the narrowness of the discourse within which these processes take place.