IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v36y2013i1p213-217.html

Asking questions in the solution space: Methodological issues in evaluating equity

Author

Listed:
  • Carden, Fred

Abstract

This paper presents an overview of some core methodological issues in improving the evaluation of health equity interventions. It argues that evaluation can play a central role in the solution space if it takes a futures orientation and develops adaptive approaches. It makes the case that purpose must drive method and that clarity in values is central. It suggests a process to rethink health equity interventions, reshape policy based on evaluation at the systems level, and reform evaluation of health equity so that it has the capacity to adapt and to more realistically reflect the dynamic and changing nature of systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Carden, Fred, 2013. "Asking questions in the solution space: Methodological issues in evaluating equity," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 213-217.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:213-217
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.03.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718912000298
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.03.010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ravallion Martin, 2009. "Should the Randomistas Rule?," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-5, February.
    2. Rodrik, Dani, 2008. "The New Development Economics: We Shall Experiment, but How Shall We Learn?," Working Paper Series rwp08-055, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    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. Gates, Emily F. & Madres, Joseph & Hall, Jori N. & Alvarez, Kayla Benitez, 2022. "It takes an ecosystem: Socioecological factors influencing equity-oriented evaluation in New England, U.S., 2021," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).

    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. Baylis, Kathy & Ham, Andres, 2015. "How important is spatial correlation in randomized controlled trials?," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205586, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Maredia, Mywish K., 2009. "Improving the proof: Evolution of and emerging trends in impact assessment methods and approaches in agricultural development," IFPRI discussion papers 929, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. David McKenzie, 2010. "Impact Assessments in Finance and Private Sector Development: What Have We Learned and What Should We Learn?," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 25(2), pages 209-233, August.
    4. William Easterly, 2009. "Can the West Save Africa?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 373-447, June.
    5. Guido W. Imbens, 2010. "Better LATE Than Nothing: Some Comments on Deaton (2009) and Heckman and Urzua (2009)," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(2), pages 399-423, June.
    6. Muller, Sean, 2014. "Randomised trials for policy: a review of the external validity of treatment effects," SALDRU Working Papers 127, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    7. Ralitza Dimova, 2019. "A Debate that Fatigues…: To Randomise or Not to Randomise; What’s the Real Question?," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(2), pages 163-168, April.
    8. Gentilini, Ugo & Omamo, Steven Were, 2011. "Social protection 2.0: Exploring issues, evidence and debates in a globalizing world," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 329-340, June.
    9. Alfred Hannig & Stefan Jansen, 2010. "Financial Inclusion and Financial Stability : Current Policy Issues," Finance Working Papers 23124, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    10. Fatoumata Nankoto Cissé, 2022. "How impact evaluation methods influence the outcomes of development projects? Evidence from a meta-analysis on decentralized solar nano projects," Post-Print halshs-03623394, HAL.
    11. Dawn Richards Elliott, 2009. "What is the Comparative Advantage of the Service Learning Pedagogy? Insights from Development Economics," Forum for Social Economics, Springer;The Association for Social Economics, vol. 38(2), pages 263-278, July.
    12. David K. Evans & Arkadipta Ghosh, 2008. "Prioritizing Educational Investments in Children in the Developing World," Working Papers WR-587, RAND Corporation.
    13. Ole Dahl Rasmussen & Nikolaj Malchow-Møller & Thomas Barnebeck Andersen, 2011. "Walking the talk: the need for a trial registry for development interventions," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 502-519, December.
    14. Sophie Webber, 2015. "Randomising Development: Geography, Economics and the Search for Scientific Rigour," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 106(1), pages 36-52, February.
    15. Khandker, Shahidur R. & Samad, Hussain A., 2013. "Are microcredit participants in Bangladesh trapped in poverty and debt ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6404, The World Bank.
    16. Martin Ravallion, 2013. "Knowledgeable bankers? The demand for research in World Bank operations," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1-29, March.
    17. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2015. "The gold standard for randomized evaluations: from discussion of method to political economy," Working Papers DT/2015/01, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    18. Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob & Jones, Michael, 2015. "Does storage technology affect adoption of improved maize varieties in Africa? Insights from Malawi’s input subsidy program," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 92-105.
    19. Marcel Fafchamps & David McKenzie & Simon Quinn & Christopher Woodruff, 2011. "When is capital enough to get female microenterprises growing? Evidence from a randomized experiment in Ghana," CSAE Working Paper Series 2011-11, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    20. Yoshino, Naoyuki & Abidhadjaev, Umid, 2017. "An impact evaluation of investment in infrastructure: The case of a railway connection in Uzbekistan," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-11.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:36:y:2013:i:1:p:213-217. 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.