IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v54y2016icp162-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic systems and the role of evaluation: The case of the Green Communities project

Author

Listed:
  • Anzoise, Valentina
  • Sardo, Stefania

Abstract

The crucial role evaluation can play in the co-development of project design and its implementation will be addressed through the analysis of a case study, the Green Communities (GC) project, funded by the Italian Ministry of Environment within the EU Interregional Operational Program (2007–2013) “Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency”. The project's broader goals included an attempt to trigger a change in Italian local development strategies, especially for mountain and inland areas, which would be tailored to the real needs of communities, and based on a sustainable exploitation and management of the territorial assets. The goal was not achieved, and this paper addresses the issues of how GC could have been more effective in fostering a vision of change, and which design adaptations and evaluation procedures would have allowed the project to better cope with the unexpected consequences and resistances it encountered. The conclusions drawn are that projects should be conceived, designed and carried out as dynamic systems, inclusive of a dynamic and engaged evaluation enabling the generation of feedbacks loops, iteratively interpreting the narratives and dynamics unfolding within the project, and actively monitoring the potential of various relationships among project participants for generating positive social change.

Suggested Citation

  • Anzoise, Valentina & Sardo, Stefania, 2016. "Dynamic systems and the role of evaluation: The case of the Green Communities project," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 162-172.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:54:y:2016:i:c:p:162-172
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.07.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718915000841
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.07.010?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. Fetterman, David M., 1994. "Steps of empowerment evaluation: From California to Cape Town," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 305-313.
    2. Graham Room, 2011. "Complexity, Institutions and Public Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14394, March.
    3. Marghertta Russo & T. P. Hughes, 2000. "Complementary Innovations And Generative Relationships: An Ethnographic Study," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 517-558.
    4. Chapman, Sarah, 2014. "A framework for monitoring social process and outcomes in environmental programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 45-53.
    5. Cabrera, Derek & Colosi, Laura & Lobdell, Claire, 2008. "Systems thinking," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 299-310, August.
    6. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    7. Joanne Martin, 1990. "Deconstructing Organizational Taboos: The Suppression of Gender Conflict in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 339-359, November.
    8. Urban, Jennifer Brown & Hargraves, Monica & Trochim, William M., 2014. "Evolutionary Evaluation: Implications for evaluators, researchers, practitioners, funders and the evidence-based program mandate," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 127-139.
    9. Lessard, Chantale, 2007. "Complexity and reflexivity: Two important issues for economic evaluation in health care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(8), pages 1754-1765, April.
    10. Lundin, Rolf A. & Söderholm, Anders, 1995. "A theory of the temporary organization," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 437-455, December.
    11. Christie, Christina A. & Montrosse, Bianca E. & Klein, Brock M., 2005. "Emergent design evaluation: A case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 271-277, August.
    12. Claes, Claudia & van Loon, Jos & Vandevelde, Stijn & Schalock, Robert, 2015. "An integrative approach to evidence based practices," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 132-136.
    13. Greg Hampton, 2009. "Narrative policy analysis and the integration of public involvement in decision making," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(3), pages 227-242, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Walton, Mat, 2014. "Applying complexity theory: A review to inform evaluation design," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 119-126.
    2. Dunkley, Ria A. & Franklin, Alex, 2017. "Failing better: The stochastic art of evaluating community-led environmental action programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 112-122.
    3. Kjell Tryggestad, 2012. "Perspectives on Projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 416-420, February.
    4. Kuebart, Andreas & Ibert, Oliver, 2019. "Beyond territorial conceptions of entrepreneurial ecosystems: The dynamic spatiality of knowledge brokering in seed accelerators," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 63(2-4), pages 118-133.
    5. Andrea Saltelli, 2007. "Composite Indicators between Analysis and Advocacy," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 81(1), pages 65-77, March.
    6. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    7. Manning, Stephan, 2017. "The rise of project network organizations: Building core teams and flexible partner pools for interorganizational projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1399-1415.
    8. Yildiz, H. Emre & Murtic, Adis & Zander, Udo, 2024. "Re-conceptualizing absorptive capacity: The importance of teams as a meso-level context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    9. Green, Rex S. & Ellis, Peter T., 2008. "Foster youth evaluate the performance of group home services in California," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 174-180, May.
    10. Calvin Morrill, 2008. "Culture and Organization Theory," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 619(1), pages 15-40, September.
    11. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    12. Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2005. "The emergence of technology systems: knowledge production and distribution in the case of the Emilian plastics district," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 29(1), pages 37-56, January.
    13. Bauer, Johannes M., 2014. "Platforms, systems competition, and innovation: Reassessing the foundations of communications policy," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 662-673.
    14. Ping Yung, 2015. "A new institutional economic theory of project management," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 228-243, February.
    15. Mähring, Magnus, 2002. "IT Project Governance: A Process-Oriented Study of Organizational Control and Executive Involvement," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2002:15, Stockholm School of Economics.
    16. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    17. Archibald, Thomas, 2015. "“They Just Know”: The epistemological politics of “evidence-based” non-formal education," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 137-148.
    18. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    19. Giuseppe Munda, 2005. "“Measuring Sustainability”: A Multi-Criterion Framework," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 117-134, January.
    20. Michal Shur‐Ofry & Ofer Malcai, 2021. "Collective action and social contagion: Community gardens as a case study," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 63-81, January.

    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:54:y:2016:i:c:p:162-172. 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.