The design of a contextualized responsive evaluation framework for fishery management in Benin
The main question addressed by this article is how to adapt the responsive evaluation (RE) approach to an intervention context characterized by repetition of ineffective interventions, ambiguous intervention action theories among stakeholders, and high complexity. The context is Grand-Popo, a fishing municipality located on Benin's southwest Atlantic coast. The fishery management interventionists and the fishing communities in the municipality all espoused concern for the sustainable improvement of fishing actors’ livelihood conditions, but differed about the reasons for this livelihood impairment, and about what should be done, when, where, and by whom. Given this ambiguity, we identified RE as a promising action research approach to facilitate dialogue and mutual learning, and consequently to improve stakeholders’ ability to resolve problems. However, this approach seems to have some shortcomings in the Grand-Popo context, regarding the repetitive ineffectiveness of interventions, high complexity, and uncertainty. Therefore, based on our empirical study, we add three dimensions to the existing RE framework: historical analysis to deal with routine interventions, exploration and discussion of incongruities of action theories to trigger double-loop learning, and system analysis to deal with complexity and uncertainty. This article does not intend to address the implications or impact of this adapted RE framework. Instead, we suggest some criteria and indicators for evaluating whether the proposed amended RE approach has assisted in resolving the fishery problems in Grand-Popo after the approach has been applied.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- 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.
- Barbara van Mierlo & Cees Leeuwis & Ruud E.H.M. Smits & Rosalinde Klein Woolthuis, 2009. "Learning towards system innovation.Evaluating a systemic instrument," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 09-13, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Aug 2009.
- Engwall, Mats, 2003. "No project is an island: linking projects to history and context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 789-808, May.
- 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.
- Jentoft, Svein & McCay, Bonnie, 1995. "User participation in fisheries management: lessons drawn from international experiences," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 227-246, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:15-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.