IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/prodev/v11y2011i4p339-353.html

Evaluating sport-for-development

Author

Listed:
  • Roger Levermore

    (Management School, University of Liverpool)

Abstract

This is the second in a series of three articles that considers the relationship between sport and furthering international development assistance. The first highlighted a significant growth in this relationship, yet evaluation of sport-for-development was criticized for being insufficient. This article therefore details the current level of evaluation of sport-for-development and highlights the approaches used whilst contextualizing it against the evaluation debate in development studies. The picture that emerges is that considerable evaluation is being conducted, particularly of programmes that have won plaudits. They tend to employ a positivist logical framework either by itself or as part of a blended methodology with some instances of participatory methods also. Concerns expressed about these approaches in the general development literature are traced in sport-for-development evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger Levermore, 2011. "Evaluating sport-for-development," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 11(4), pages 339-353, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:prodev:v:11:y:2011:i:4:p:339-353
    DOI: 10.1177/146499341001100405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/146499341001100405
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/146499341001100405?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. Elisabeth Paul, 2005. "Evaluating fair trade as a development project: methodological considerations," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 134-150.
    2. repec:wbk:wbpubs:13949 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Lisa Bornstein, 2006. "Systems of Accountability, Webs of Deceit? Monitoring and Evaluation in South African NGOs," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 49(2), pages 52-61, June.
    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. Leutgeb, Anita, 2014. "Fair Trade, better lives? An assessment of Fair Trade's contribution to improve Turkana basket weavers' livelihoods," ÖFSE-Forum, Austrian Foundation for Development Research (ÖFSE), volume 59, number 59.
    2. Blaser Mapitsa, Caitlin & Chirau, Takunda J., 2019. "Institutionalising the evaluation function: A South African study of impartiality, use and cost," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 38-42.
    3. Le Fanu, Guy, 2014. "International development, disability, and education: Towards a capabilities-focused discourse and praxis," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 69-79.
    4. Nelson Grima & Lisa Ringhofer & Simron J. Singh & Barbara Smetschka & Christian Lauk, 2017. "Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Development Practice: Can the Concept of PES Deliver?," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 17(4), pages 267-281, October.
    5. Cathy Farnworth & Michael Goodman, 2008. "Growing Ethical Networks : The Fair Trade Market for Raw and Processed Agricultural Products (in Five Parts) with Associated Case Studies on Africa and Latin America," World Bank Publications - Reports 9124, The World Bank Group.
    6. Adela Itzkin & Jai Kumar Clifford-Holmes & Mary Scholes & Kaera Coetzer, 2022. "Approaches to Enhance Integration and Monitoring for Social-Ecological Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, October.

    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:sae:prodev:v:11:y:2011:i:4:p:339-353. 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: .

    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.