|
Key Questions in Evaluation of Governance Issues in Advocacy Coalitions: Insights From a Study of NGO Advocacy Networks in Latin America
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Bonnie Shepard,
Social Sectors Development Strategies Inc,
bshepard@ssds.net
|
| Abstract:
This study from Latin America on internal governance issues in 13 national and regional advocacy networks points to the importance of systematic analysis of internal governance structures and processes in evaluations of advocacy coalitions. Without such analysis, important factors in a coalition’s ability to meet its objectives will not come to light. The study examined membership and leadership structures, decision-making rules, level of chapter autonomy and representation, and the trade-off between increased diversity in membership vs. ability to achieve consensus on political actions and statements. The influence of external factors on internal governance is also important to consider. In this study, the level of financial stability of members and the level of controversy attached to particular advocacy issues strongly affected the internal governance of the networks and in some cases, resulted in inability to make joint public statements or take unified action.
|
|
Learning From Your Neighbor: The Value of Public Participation Evaluation for Public Policy Dispute Resolution
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Maureen Berner,
University of North Carolina Chapel Hill,
mberner@sog.unc.edu
|
| John Stephens,
University of North Carolina Chapel Hill,
stephens@sog.unc.edu
|
| Abstract:
Most evaluations of Public Policy Dispute Resolutions (PPDR) simply assess the existence of public participation, not a true evaluation of its quality, value or impact. This separation is a detriment to achieving a stronger perspective on PPDR as a whole. Can methods of evaluating public participation be effectively incorporated into evaluating PPDRs? We first compare the two fields, highlighting the ability to borrow strength from each. We then examine PPDR relevant literature, finding that the evaluation gap in PPDR can be addressed by more explicitly incorporating the theory and methods from public participation evaluation. In particular, we find the methods may be more successfully incorporated if one goal of the PPDR process is a public view of legitimacy. Finally, we suggest a specific model that can be used in PPDR evaluations.
|
| |