Denna uppsats undersöker hur den svenska myndigheten Sida med föregångare använt människorättsbegreppet i årsredovisningar 1956 – 2019. Specifikt undersöks vilken relation detta har till epistemiska jämlikhetsdimensioner i materialet. Med epistemisk makt menas makten att påverka de begrepp och diskurser som ligger till grund för förståelsen av bistånd och utvecklingssamarbeten. Människorättsbegreppet var i stort sett osynligt i materialet fram till1980. Från och med slutet av 1980-talet associeras mänskliga rättigheter starkt till demokratibegreppet på ett sätt som därefter dominerar stora delar av materialet. Under 2010-talet syns också en ökande association mellan mänskliga rättigheter och jämställdhets- respektive miljöfrågor. Även om det finns exempel på formuleringar som reproducerar epistemisk ojämlikheteller återspeglar en eurocentrisk universalism, är exemplen förhållandevis få. Givet Sidas speciella uppdrag, är det naturligt att fokus ligger på problem och lösningar i länder i det globala Syd. Samtidigt bidrar detta dock till en epistemiskt ojämlik helhet av diskurser där den sammantagna bilden blir att det globala Syd utgör arenan där både hinder och lösningar för hållbar utveckling finns. Det kan leda till att de förändringar som krävs i Nord för att uppnå en hållbar global utveckling inte får tillräckligt med uppmärksamhet. / This study examines how the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)and its predecessors have used the concept of human rights in annual reports 1956 – 2019, and what relation this use has to epistemic equality. Epistemic power is the power over the conceptsand discourses, forming the basis for the understanding of international development. Human rights as a notion is almost invisible in the reports until 1980. As from the end of the 1980s and onwards, the concept is associated to democracy in a way that dominates large parts of the reports. In the 2010s, the concept is also increasingly connected to gender equality and environmental issues. Although there are examples of reproduction of epistemic inequality or mirroring of an eurocentric universalism, these are proportionately few. Due to Sida’s mission, it’s natural to focus on problems and solutions in the Global South. At the same time, this contributes to an epistemically unequal entirety of discourses, in which the overall picture is that the Global South is where both obstacles and solutions to sustainable development are to be found. This way, changes in the Global North that are also necessary to achieve global sustainable development will not be paid sufficient attention. / <p>Godkänt datum 2020-06-05</p>

Religion has played a central part in human history and is still a foundation in many societies. Faith-based organizations are in some countries the largest providers of social services and were pioneers in the humanitarian aid sector. There is in academia a growing interest in faith-based organizations and a perception that they have an advantage over their secular counterparts. This study has identified those established theories and provided a comprehensive overview of the research field. It has been argued that faith-based organizations for one should be more cost-effective than their secular counterparts. The faith of their staff members is a significant part of their motivation. They, therefore, accept lower salaries or volunteer to a higher degree. It has also been argued that projects implemented by faith-based organizations could be more rooted in local communities due to a long history of cooperation and collaboration. The claims have been mostly theoretical or supported by qualitative studies. This study contributed to filling the quantitative research gap by analyzing key differences between projects implemented by faith-based and secular organizations that were financed by the United Nations Country-Based Pooled Funds. The data selection provided a scenario where the institutional pressure from strict processes, monitoring, and evaluation theoretically minimizes differences between implementers and therefore tested the study’s hypotheses in a least-likely scenario. The analysis found that there was no significant difference between how many beneficiaries the projects reached. Faith-based organizations did however implement projects that with 95 % certainty costed between 2.20 to 7.87 % less compared to their secular counterparts. Their projects with 95 % certainty also had a four percent higher direct-to-total project cost ratio. This provides support for the theoretical claims and contributed to building a foundation for future research in this emerging field. The study surprisingly also found a significant and large difference in project cost between national and international implementers. Projects implemented by national organizations with 95 % certainty cost between 27.98 and 31.50 % less than projects implemented by international organizations. They with 95 % certainty also had a six percent higher direct-to-total project cost ratio. It was not in the scope of this paper to determine what these results depended on but they give further fuel to the current localization debate in both academia and public administration.