IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v33y2010i3p238-245.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participation of marginalized groups in evaluation: Mission impossible?

Author

Listed:
  • Baur, Vivianne E.
  • Abma, Tineke A.
  • Widdershoven, Guy A.M.

Abstract

Responsive evaluation facilitates a dialogical process by creating social conditions that enhance equal input from all stakeholders. However, when multiple stakeholders are involved, some groups tend to go unheard or not be taken seriously. In these cases, empowerment of the more silent voices is needed. The inclusion of marginalized groups in evaluation is thus a challenge for evaluators. It raises questions about how to include all stakeholders in the evaluation process in a way that empowers marginalized stakeholder groups, and at the same time is acceptable for the dominant stakeholder groups. In this article we describe our experiences with a responsive evaluation project on the participation of client councils in policy processes in a Dutch residential care and nursing home organization. We focus on the value of hermeneutic dialogue (fostering mutual understanding and learning processes) in addressing the challenges of working with stakeholders in unequal relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Baur, Vivianne E. & Abma, Tineke A. & Widdershoven, Guy A.M., 2010. "Participation of marginalized groups in evaluation: Mission impossible?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 238-245, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:3:p:238-245
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(09)00088-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abma, T. A., 2000. "Stakeholder conflict: a case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 199-210, May.
    2. McDonald, Diane, 2008. "Revisiting a theory of negotiation: The utility of Markiewicz (2005) proposed six principles," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 259-265, August.
    3. Abma, T. A., 2000. "Responding to ambiguity, responding to change the value of a responsive approach to evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 461-470, November.
    4. Abma, Tineke A., 2005. "Responsive evaluation: Its meaning and special contribution to health promotion," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 279-289, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kouévi, A.T. & Van Mierlo, B. & Leeuwis, C. & Vodouhê, S.D., 2013. "The design of a contextualized responsive evaluation framework for fishery management in Benin," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 15-28.
    2. Hoon Chuah, Fiona Leh & Srivastava, Aastha & Singh, Shweta Rajkumar & Haldane, Victoria & Huat Koh, Gerald Choon & Seng, Chia Kee & McCoy, David & Legido-Quigley, Helena, 2018. "Community participation in general health initiatives in high and upper-middle income countries: A systematic review exploring the nature of participation, use of theories, contextual drivers and powe," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 106-122.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abma, Tineke A., 2005. "Responsive evaluation: Its meaning and special contribution to health promotion," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 279-289, August.
    2. Bindels, J. & Cox, K. & Widdershoven, G. & van Schayck, C.P. & Abma, T.A., 2014. "Stimulating program implementation via a Community of Practice: A responsive evaluation of care programs for frail older people in the Netherlands," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 115-121.
    3. Mohammad Sohail Yunis & Laila Durrani & Amad Khan, 2017. "Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Pakistan: A Critique of the Literature and Future Research Agenda," Business & Economic Review, Institute of Management Sciences, Peshawar, Pakistan, vol. 9(1), pages 65-88, March.
    4. Jolley, Gwyneth, 2014. "Evaluating complex community-based health promotion: Addressing the challenges," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 71-81.
    5. Visse, Merel & Abma, Tineke A. & Widdershoven, Guy A.M., 2012. "Relational responsibilities in responsive evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 97-104.
    6. Jill Bindels & Karen Cox & Guy Widdershoven & Onno CP van Schayck & Tineke A Abma, 2014. "Care for community‐dwelling frail older people: a practice nurse perspective," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(15-16), pages 2313-2322, August.
    7. Kouévi, T.A. & van Mierlo, B. & Leeuwis, C., 2013. "Learning about fishery management: Evaluation of a contextualized responsive evaluation approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-11.
    8. Kouévi, A.T. & Van Mierlo, B. & Leeuwis, C. & Vodouhê, S.D., 2013. "The design of a contextualized responsive evaluation framework for fishery management in Benin," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 15-28.
    9. Gert Schout & Gideon De Jong, 2018. "The Weakening of Kin Ties: Exploring the Need for Life-World Led Interventions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-12, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:3:p:238-245. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.