IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/loceco/v28y2013i7-8p842-851.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to raise the bar on impact evaluation: Challenges for the evaluation of local enterprise partnerships and the regional growth fund in times of austerity

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Chadwick
  • Peter Tyler
  • Colin Warnock

Abstract

This article discusses the challenges that local enterprise partnerships are likely to experience in evaluation given the severe constraints on the funds available to evaluators and local enterprise partnerships. It highlights the rationale and benefits of conducting evaluation and examines how local enterprise partnerships might benefit from previous evaluation efforts. It also considers some of the technical and practical challenges of conducting evaluation in the current constrained financial climate, including the challenge of ensuring a common format in programme evaluation; attributing the impact on outcomes arising from government intervention; the difficulty of assessing the durability of benefits and putting a monetary value on the benefits arising from government intervention. The article concludes with some key messages on evaluation for local enterprise partnerships and those evaluating local economic development activities in times of austerity.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Chadwick & Peter Tyler & Colin Warnock, 2013. "How to raise the bar on impact evaluation: Challenges for the evaluation of local enterprise partnerships and the regional growth fund in times of austerity," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 28(7-8), pages 842-851, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:loceco:v:28:y:2013:i:7-8:p:842-851
    DOI: 10.1177/0269094213505982
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0269094213505982
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0269094213505982?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Tyler & Colin Warnock & Allan Provins & Bruno Lanz, 2013. "Valuing the Benefits of Urban Regeneration," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(1), pages 169-190, January.
    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. Cristina Mateos-Mora & María Rosa Herrera-Gutiérrez & Cristina González-Benítez, 2021. "The Impacts of Area-Based Policies on Essential Retail in Vulnerable Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-17, July.
    2. repec:cep:spccrp:19 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Amanda Fitzgerald & Ruth Lupton, 2015. "The Coalition's Record on Area Regeneration and Neighbourhood Renewal: Policy, Spending and Outcomes 2010-2015," CASE - Social Policy in a Cold Climate Working Paper 19, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    4. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2013. "Valuing Local Environmental Amenity with Discrete Choice Experiments: Spatial Scope Sensitivity and Heterogeneous Marginal Utility of Income," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 105-130, September.
    5. Aarland, Kristin & Osland, Liv & Gjestland, Arnstein, 2017. "Do area-based intervention programs affect house prices? A quasi-experimental approach," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 67-83.
    6. Jin Hui Lee & Sangyon Lim, 2018. "An Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Approach for Sustainable Assessment of Economy-Based and Community-Based Urban Regeneration: The Case of South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, November.
    7. Jasper Beekmans & Huub Ploegmakers & Karel Martens & Erwin van der Krabben, 2016. "Countering decline of industrial sites: Do local economic development policies target the neediest places?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(14), pages 3027-3047, November.
    8. Kevin Dean & Claudia Trillo & Erik Bichard, 2017. "Assessing the Value of Housing Schemes through Sustainable Return on Investment: A Path towards Sustainability-Led Evaluations?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Huub Ploegmakers & Pascal Beckers, 2015. "Evaluating urban regeneration: An assessment of the effectiveness of physical regeneration initiatives on run-down industrial sites in the Netherlands," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(12), pages 2151-2169, September.
    10. Melissa Butcher & Luke Dickens, 2016. "Spatial Dislocation and Affective Displacement: Youth Perspectives on Gentrification in London," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 800-816, July.
    11. Lawless, Paul & Tyler, Peter & Overman, Henry G., 2011. "Strategies for underperforming places," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59236, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Egan, Matt & Kearns, Ade & Katikireddi, Srinivasa V. & Curl, Angela & Lawson, Kenny & Tannahill, Carol, 2016. "Proportionate universalism in practice? A quasi-experimental study (GoWell) of a UK neighbourhood renewal programme's impact on health inequalities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 41-49.
    13. Ghadiri, Mohaddese & Sarrafi, Mozaffar, 2022. "Integrating support groups, an effective approach to regenerate historic neighborhoods of Iran Case study: Oudlajan Neighborhood, Tehran," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    14. Lupton, Ruth & Arque, Amanda, 2015. "The Coalition's record on area regeneration and neighbourhood renewal: policy, spending and outcomes 2010-2015," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121534, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:sae:loceco:v:28:y:2013:i:7-8:p:842-851. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/index.shtml .

    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.