What is the STEHD framework for?

Following the CA, the STEHD framework advanced in the previous section as an agency-oriented and opportunity-based theory challenges traditional (non-historic, non-institutional, place-neutral, non-evolutionary), analytical and operational approaches.

It is crucial to emphasize that there is no unique way to interpret and uti­lize the STEHD framework or to constrain the scope for its application. Thus, it can be used for analytical accounts, as well as for the design, monitoring and evaluation of development initiatives (Muniz Castillo, 2011; Biggeri and Ferrannini, 2014; Ferrero and Zepeda, 2014), as it encourages us to move beyond the mainstream "project approach” informational space, design and tools (Alkire, 2002 and 2008; Frediani, 2007).

By considering the different elements of the STEHD framework in turn, it is possible to anticipate the main questions entailed in its procedural applica­tion to case studies. The questions are summarized in Table 2.1 and should not be regarded as either exhaustive or prescriptive. Instead, they consti­tute a starting point for comprehensive and complex analysis where both traditional and new issues for investigation are taken into consideration in a logical - and flexible - way. In this regard, a historical and systemic perspective¹⁵ is required to examine a given LDS at a particular point in time during each procedural step. Nonetheless, it is important to acknowledge that each issue may take different amounts of time and effort.

A comprehensive analysis should rely on the combination of differ­ent tools and methods - both qualitative and quantitative - that provide Table 2.1 Relevant issues composing the procedural application of the STEHD framework

Interaction among local actors and visions of development

Who are the main local actors and stakeholders? What are their characteristics and power relations?

What are the spaces and mechanisms for participation and deliberation? And how accessible are they for local and extra-local actors?

What are valuable opportunities for the LDS?

Is there a local vision of development?

Enabling/disabling factors

What are the territorial resources for and barriers to local development (e.g.

What are the characteristics of the local systemic institutional structure (i.e. norms, culture, laws, etc.)?

What are the information flows and their diffusion within the LDS?

What is the ability/capacity of the LDS to function, given the interaction of local stakeholders in public and private sectors and in civil society?

Multilevel processes

Is the local vision of development aligned to multilevel governance processes?

How are territorial enabling and disabling factors shaped by multilevel relations (i.e. within the LDS and at national, global and trans-territorial level)?

Opportunity set, governance and achieved functionings

What is the opportunity set (vector of achievable functionings) of the LDS? And how does it relate to the local vision of development?

Is there political willingness to pursue the local vision of development?

What is the degree of multilevel conscious governance and transformative participation?

What are the achieved functionings of the LDS?

Feedback loops and binding constraints

What are the main positive and negative feedback loops derived from the achievement of certain functionings (e.g. institution-building, learning processes)?

What are the most binding constraints driving a wedge between achieved functionings, achievable functionings and valuable opportunities of the LDS?

What is the interplay between and causal relationship among the most binding constraints affecting development effectiveness? (e.g. processes of multi-causality, mutual reinforcement, compensation)

Policy building

Which are the main nodes of the system for building policy solutions?

Under which assumptions can policy strategies for SHD at the local level be built?

complementary information. In particular, participatory techniques (see Appendix 4.1), as well as alternative ways of modeling (as discussed in Appendix 2.1), provide strong tools that can embrace the complexity of these issues.

Although the STEHD framework displays its highest potential in com­prehensive analyses, the purpose of the application may lead researchers, stakeholders and policymakers to focus on different elements of the framework. For instance, stakeholder analysis focuses on the local rela­tional and power structure; policy design devotes attention to individual capabilities and territorial opportunities; monitoring looks at outputs and achieved functionings; policy evaluation considers final outcomes (i.e. long­term achieved functionings at individual and territorial level) and other relevant information to understand how and why development programs have succeeded or failed (e.g. regarding empowerment in Oakley, 2001).

The STEHD framework can help visualize and explore the alignment of different phenomena (e.g. industrial clusters, international cooperation pro­grams, the presence of MNCs, innovation processes, institutional or sectoral reforms) with SHD goals and functionings of the local system (e.g. provi­sion of local public goods). Some concrete examples help to illustrate this point.

• The endogenous development of an industrial cluster based on local “atmosphere” and “spirit”, consolidated relationships of cooperation and competition and internal nurturing dynamics would perform very differ­ently in SHD terms from a top-down imposition of a cluster intended simply as a brand to attract foreign resources.

• The presence of MNCs within the LDS would entail a diverse range of out­comes and processes whether they are territorially embedded or detached for exploitative purposes.

• Innovation processes would expand or reduce different territorial oppor­tunities and individual capabilities, depending upon, for instance, the productive use of resources (e.g. technological and organizational innova­tion) or the social dimension of participation and accessibility to services (e.g. social innovation and social business).

To conclude, this interpretative framework represents a standardized, flex­ible and adaptable model, taking on diverse forms in relation to specific inquiries. The STEHD framework allows us to identify general rules and processes common to different territorial contexts, and helps policymakers and other stakeholders to act as “case managers” in order to tailor policies and strategies to local circumstances, while avoiding dogmatic blue-print approaches to development. In this respect, the STEHD framework can help identify bottlenecks and areas where a catalyst policy can be used to boost SHD processes through interactive learning procedures (e.g. institutional learning), the opening up of new spaces for dialogue and the development of instruments to coordinate networks, actors and actions, as well as the enhancement of social creativity.

2.5