The International Council’s research methodology
The Council sets out to do practical research in the field of human rights that is:
◦ independent
◦ international
◦ interdisciplinary and
◦ consultative
How does it interpret these values?
Practical research
We take this to mean that the Council examines dilemmas and problems in an open-ended manner. Countries or geographical regions are not the subject of Council inquiry, though it undertakes fieldwork in countries to support its research. It does not research cases.
All the Council’s research has a practical focus. The Board selects subjects for research that organisations working operationally on human rights consider need attention. Proposals are brought to the Board by Council members (who are themselves directly engaged in human rights work) or other sources.
All projects are designed to generate findings that are practical and useful. Project designs specify research questions that have a practical focus and, before research starts, the Secretariat consults a range of organisations and experts to confirm that the questions chosen are relevant (and have not been researched by others). One of the main duties of project Advisors is to make sure that research remains focused on practical outcomes.
With the same objective, the Council strives to make research reports accessible. Without being over-simplified, they are written in non-technical, in particular non-legal, language, and much effort goes into removing jargon and clarifying the text.
The Council’s commitment to practicality does not mean that it avoids theoretical work. Where organisations find their programmes are hampered by theoretical difficulties, the Council will undertake work on such matters. For example, it has analysed what human rights law says about transnational obligations, and the legal obligations of companies in relation to human rights law. Both these relatively theoretical reports were written with practical use in mind.
Human rights
Work in support of human rights includes a strong legal tradition. Some of the Council’s work has a specifically legal focus, and all its research takes account of human rights law. Most of the Council’s Research Directors are human rights lawyers and many members of the Council and Board, and project Advisory Groups, are too. This said, the Council interprets “human rights” broadly and does not confine its mandate to a purely legal understanding of human rights. Much of its work has been pragmatic rather than normative and has looked at how institutions actually behave rather than at how they ought to be constructed. The Council is also willing to think “outside the box”: it recognises that one of its most important roles is to provoke fresh thinking, address areas of contradiction and emerging issues, and “imagine” the future evolution of human rights work.
Much of the Council’s research therefore “stretches” discussion of human rights issues beyond current thinking. But it tends to do so in a manner that takes account of human rights law and can be accommodated by mainstream proponents of human rights.
Independence
Independence can be understood in terms of refusal to align with other parties or positions; or in terms of neutrality or impartiality. The Council’s stance is somewhat different. With respect to human rights (as understood above) the Council is partisan; however, it seeks to be demonstrably and transparently open to different views, without prejudice. Our objective is to embrace difference, fairly. While the Council is firmly independent of governments and inter-governmental agencies, and voluntary and private sector organisations, it works closely with all such bodies in the pursuit of its research objectives.
On most of the issues it researches, the Council starts with no position of its own and claims no special standing in relation to the subject researched. It adopts this posture on grounds of principle but also because the Secretariat cannot be expected to possess in-house expertise on all the new research subjects nominated by the Board.
International
The Council has an international approach. It believes that long-lasting solutions to difficult policy issues must be acceptable to people from different regions; and that this has important implications because people from different regions perceive the same issues differently. Accordingly, the Council actively includes people from different regions in its research processes, Research Teams, and consultation.
The Council seeks to be fully international: it takes neither a “Southern” nor a “Northern” perspective. However, since “Southern” points of view are less often heard, and often given less consideration, the Council makes a particular effort to ensure that “Southern” views are properly represented throughout the Council’s research process and in its work.
Interdisciplinary
Most complex policy problems cannot be resolved by the intervention of organisations of one kind, acting alone – whether these are governments, NGOs, or multilateral agencies. Successful solutions require intervention (and usually co-operation) from a variety of actors. Equally, expertise of different kinds is usually required. With this in mind, the Council invites people with different but relevant expertise to participate in its research processes. In line with this approach, Council Research Teams and meetings usually involve individuals from international organisations, governments, the legal profession, national and international NGOs, and scholars from several disciplines. The test of inclusion is whether the discipline or institution has a direct interest and its inclusion is necessary to solutions.
Consultative
The Council does not claim (when research commences) to have independent standing or expertise on the issues it studies. It also accepts the need to include (and embrace) a wide variety of perspectives in the process of research – geographical, disciplinary and institutional. The Council has developed an approach to consultation that accepts the implications of these starting points. It is not afraid to circulate for comment draft reports that are clearly imperfect or unfinished; it attempts to take fair account of all comments received; and it distributes draft reports, and summaries of its findings, to a very broad range of organisations in a large number of countries.
The scale of consultation varies. In some projects, very wide consultation is not appropriate. In others, draft reports may be sent to over 600 organisations or individuals in dozens of countries. All the Council’s published and draft reports, and most of its background research papers, are posted on the Council’s web site and can be downloaded.
The widening constituency model
Because it works in this way, the Council needs to generate and sustain the trust of the many groups of people with whom it co-operates. The Council needs to be transparent in its approach to research, consultation, reporting and follow-up. Its methodology relies on an idea of progressive international consultation. It aims to involve target audiences increasingly as the research process advances. Initially, the work is done by a small group of experts. As research continues, more people with skills or responsibility in the area concerned are consulted about drafts, research findings and recommendations. The process is an open one. At each stage, consultations cover a range of institutions and countries and include feedback. The aim is to enable a widening circle of people with a direct interest to engage with the content of the research, to improve it, to acquire a sense of ownership over the findings, and finally to support or promote them – leading to practical action based on research.
STAGES
1. Conception (Council, Board, Secretariat)
Board selects theme, after taking advice in particular from the Council. Secretariat defines theme after informal and formal consultation with experts. Board approves theme for development.
2. Design (Board, Secretariat, Advisors)
Secretariat designs list of research questions, methodology, timetable and budget. During this phase, a Research Team is usually appointed (Research Director, Advisors, Researchers).
3. Initial research (Research Team)
The Research Team prepares papers or draft reports in consultation with other experts. A review meeting may be held to clarify issues and develop arguments.
4. Consultation on draft (Research Team, Executive Director, Stakeholders)
A draft report, usually written by a Lead Researcher and edited by the Secretariat, is sent for comment to the Council, Board, Research Team, review meeting participants and selected institutions and individuals in different countries. Comments are reflected in the final report. Regional meetings with different stakeholders may be held to consider the draft.
5. Publication (Research Team, Executive Director)
A report and separate summary are published simultaneously. The summary is in several languages. It is sent to the group identified in (4) and to a much broader group of decision-makers selected for their direct interest in the issue.
6. Follow-up (Secretariat, Research Team, Partners)
Follow-up meetings are arranged with governmental and non-governmental institutions in different countries, in order to raise awareness and catalyse action by key institutions that can operationalise the research findings.
