IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v55y2016icp55-66.html

Experiences with systematic triangulation at the Global Environment Facility

Author

Listed:
  • Carugi, Carlo

Abstract

Systematic triangulation may address common challenges in evaluation, such as the scarcity or unreliability of data, or the complexities of comparing and cross-checking evidence from diverse disciplines. Used to identify key evaluation findings, its application has proven to be effective in addressing the limitations encountered in country-level evaluation analysis conducted by the Independent Evaluation Office of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). These include the scarcity or unreliability of national statistics on environmental indicators and data series, especially in Least Developed Countries; challenges in evaluating the impacts of GEF projects; and inherent difficulties in defining the GEF portfolio of projects prior to the undertaking of the evaluation. In addition to responding to the need for further developing triangulation protocols, procedures and/or methodologies advocated by some authors, the approach offers a contribution to evaluation practice. This applies particularly to those evaluation units tasked with country-level evaluations in international organizations, facing similar constraints.

Suggested Citation

  • Carugi, Carlo, 2016. "Experiences with systematic triangulation at the Global Environment Facility," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 55-66.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:55:y:2016:i:c:p:55-66
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.12.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718915001299
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.12.001?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. Paul Downward & Andrew Mearman, 2007. "Retroduction as mixed-methods triangulation in economic research: reorienting economics into social science," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 31(1), pages 77-99, January.
    2. Richard M. Burton & Børge Obel, 2011. "Computational Modeling for What-Is, What-Might-Be, and What-Should-Be Studies---And Triangulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1195-1202, October.
    3. Emma Näslund-Hadley & Scott Kipp & Jessica Cruz & Pablo Ibarrarán & Gita Steiner-Khamsi, 2009. "OLPC Pre-Pilot Evaluation Report (Haiti)," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 23758, Inter-American Development Bank.
    4. Layug, Allan S., 2009. "Triangulation Framework for Local Service Delivery," Discussion Papers DP 2009-37, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    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. Chen, Yizhong & Lu, Hongwei & Li, Jing & Huang, Guohe & He, Li, 2016. "Regional planning of new-energy systems within multi-period and multi-option contexts: A case study of Fengtai, Beijing, China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 356-372.
    2. Daniel Runfola & Geeta Batra & Anupam Anand & Audrey Way & Seth Goodman, 2020. "Exploring the Socioeconomic Co-benefits of Global Environment Facility Projects in Uganda Using a Quasi-Experimental Geospatial Interpolation (QGI) Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, April.

    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. Bertrand Guillotin & Vincent Mangematin, 2015. "Internationalization strategies of business schools - how flat is the world?," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01265950, HAL.
    2. Fragkandreas, Thanos, 2025. "Case study research on innovation systems: Paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    3. Therese Jefferson & Siobhan Austen & Rhonda Sharp & Rachel Ong & Gill Lewin & Valerie Adams, 2014. "Mixed-methods research: What’s in it for economists?," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 25(2), pages 290-305, June.
    4. Brian Rubineau & Roberto M. Fernandez, 2013. "Missing Links: Referrer Behavior and Job Segregation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(11), pages 2470-2489, November.
    5. Andrew Mearman, 2012. "Pluralist economics curricula: do they work; and how would we know?," Working Papers 20121203, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    6. De Silva, Muthu & Howells, Jeremy & Meyer, Martin, 2018. "Innovation intermediaries and collaboration: Knowledge–based practices and internal value creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 70-87.
    7. Robert Garnett & Andrew Mearman, 2011. "Contending Perspectives, Twenty Years On: What Have Our Students Learned?," Working Papers 201104, Texas Christian University, Department of Economics.
    8. Steinmo, Marianne & Rasmussen, Einar, 2018. "The interplay of cognitive and relational social capital dimensions in university-industry collaboration: Overcoming the experience barrier," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1964-1974.
    9. Per L. Bylund, 2015. "Signifying Williamson's Contribution to the Transaction Cost Approach: An Agent-Based Simulation of Coasean Transaction Costs and Specialization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 148-174, January.
    10. Busby, J.S., 2019. "The co-evolution of competition and parasitism in the resource-based view: A risk model of product counterfeiting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 300-313.
    11. Andrew Mearman & Tim Wakeley & Gamila Shoib & Don J. Webber, 2011. "Does Pluralism in Economics Education Make Better Educated, Happier Students? A Qualitative Analysis," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 10(2), pages 50-62.
    12. Jackson Emerson Abraham, 2017. "Theoretical and Methodological Context of (Post)-Modern Econometrics and Competing Philosophical Discourses for Policy Prescription," Journal of Heterodox Economics, Sciendo, vol. 4(2), pages 119-129, December.
    13. Luigi Mosca & Martina Gianecchini & Diego Campagnolo, 2021. "Correction to: Organizational life cycle models: a design perspective," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 10(3), pages 139-139, December.
    14. Zur Shapira, 2011. "“I've Got a Theory Paper---Do You?”: Conceptual, Empirical, and Theoretical Contributions to Knowledge in the Organizational Sciences," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1312-1321, October.
    15. Wendy Olsen, 2019. "Bridging to Action Requires Mixed Methods, Not Only Randomised Control Trials," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(2), pages 139-162, April.
    16. Sheen S. Levine & Michael J. Prietula, 2014. "Open Collaboration for Innovation: Principles and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1414-1433, October.
    17. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.
    18. Annie Tubadji & Vassilis Angelis & Peter Nijkamp, 2016. "Endogenous intangible resources and their place in the institutional hierarchy," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 36(1), pages 1-28, February.
    19. De Silva, Muthu & Howells, Jeremy & Khan, Zaheer & Meyer, Martin, 2022. "Innovation ambidexterity and public innovation Intermediaries: The mediating role of capabilities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 14-29.
    20. Hamidreza Rabiei-Dastjerdi & Finbarr Brereton & Eoin O’Neill, 2025. "Towards designing a comprehensive composite index for social vulnerability to natural hazards in the big data era: potential challenges and partial solutions," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 121(4), pages 3885-3913, March.

    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:55:y:2016:i:c:p:55-66. 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.