|
Session Title: Promoting Policy-Relevant Impact Evaluation for Enhanced Development Effectiveness
|
|
Panel Session 604 to be held in Centennial Section C on Friday, Nov 7, 1:35 PM to 3:05 PM
|
|
Sponsored by the Presidential Strand
and the International and Cross-cultural Evaluation TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Jim Rugh,
Independent Consultant,
jimrugh@mindspring.com
|
| Abstract:
The results agenda set adopted by many development agencies has driven a desire for stronger evidence to be provided by impact evaluation. At the same time there have been calls from some quarters for impact evaluation to become more rigorous. Various agencies have been involved in promoting different initiatives to expand coverage by quality impact evaluations, but have been aware of issues regarding both methodological debates and questions of ownership. The presenters in this session provide differing perspectives on the development impact evaluation debate: from a bilateral agency, a developing country evaluator and that of an insider in the new initiatives
|
|
A Bilateral Perspective
|
| Nick York,
Department for International Development,
n-york@dfid.gov.uk
|
|
The United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) has strongly aligned itself with the Millennium Development Goals and the associated results agenda. Like other UK government departments, DFID has a Public Service Agreement with the Treasury which sets outcome targets to be achieved in the main recipients of UK development aid. But this approach raises the question of if changes in outcomes can be attributed to UK development assistance, hence an increased interest in impact evaluation. DFID financed a partnership with the Bank's Independent Evaluation Group, which not only provided an entry into impact evaluation debates, but created the platform from which NONIE was launched. DFID is also a supporter of 3ie. The presentation will comment on the evolving international architecture for impact evaluation from the point of view of a bilateral agency, and the challenges for evaluation posed by the changing aid environment.
|
|
|
A Developing Country Perspective
|
| Zenda Ofir,
African Evaluation Association,
zenda@evalnet.co.za
|
|
There has been a proliferation of interest in impact evaluation in recent years. But the resulting initiatives started out as Northern-driven, with some agencies promoting an approach solely dependent on Randomized Control Trials (RCTs). However, there has been an opening up of these initiatives with expanding membership of NONIE and signs that 3ie is seeking to promote a Southern-led and implemented impact evaluation program. As a result developing country evaluators have shifted their view of at least some of these initiatives from one of skepticism to cautious engagement. However, debates remain. This presentation lays out developments to date from a developing country perspective and lays out the issues which still need to be addressed.
| |
|
An Insider's View
|
| Howard White,
International Institute for Impact Evaluation,
hwhite@3ieimpact.org
|
|
The development of NONIE and 3ie have both taken place over strongly contested territory - from the meaning of impact, through methodological debates to questions of ownership and due process. Moreover the apparent proliferation of initiatives seems to run counter to donor claims to be moving toward harmonization. The presenter has been close to the development of these initiatives, first as a prime mover in NONIE and now as Executive Director of 3ie. At the same time he participated in debates in the World Bank in which IEG was fighting a rear guard action to protect policy relevance in impact evaluation design which was in danger of being overlooked in the clamor for technical rigor. This presentation will lay out the choices which have been made as the initiatives have developed.
| |