IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bwp/bwppap/7309.html

Towards a Plurality of Methods in Project Evaluation: A Contextualised Approach to Understanding Impact Trajectories and Efficacy

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Woolcock

Abstract

Understanding the efficacy of development projects requires not only a plausible counterfactual, but an appropriate match between the shape of impact trajectory over time and the deployment of a corresponding array of research tools capable of empirically discerning such a trajectory. At present, however, the development community knows very little, other than by implicit assumption, about the expected shape of the impact trajectory from any given sector or project type, and as such is prone to routinely making attribution errors. Randomisation per se does not solve this problem. The sources and manifestations of these problems are considered, along with some constructive suggestions for responding to them.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Woolcock, 2009. "Towards a Plurality of Methods in Project Evaluation: A Contextualised Approach to Understanding Impact Trajectories and Efficacy," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 7309, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    • Handle: RePEc:bwp:bwppap:7309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hummedia.manchester.ac.uk/institutes/gdi/publications/workingpapers/bwpi/bwpi-wp-7309.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cornwall, Andrea & Aghajanian, Alia, 2017. "How to Find out What’s Really Going On: Understanding Impact through Participatory Process Evaluation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 173-185.
    2. Prowse, Martin & Camfield, Laura, 2009. "What role for qualitative methods in randomized experiments?," IOB Working Papers 2009.05, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
    3. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2023. "Learning from experiences of evaluators implementing theory-driven evaluations in diverse settings: Building on the contributions of John Mayne," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Rao, Vijayendra, 2020. "Evidence-based development needs a diversity of tools, with a bottom-up process of “embedded” dialogue," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    5. Michael A. Clemens & Gabriel Demombynes, 2011. "When does rigorous impact evaluation make a difference? The case of the Millennium Villages," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 305-339, September.
    6. David McKenzie & Christopher Woodruff, 2014. "What Are We Learning from Business Training and Entrepreneurship Evaluations around the Developing World?," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 29(1), pages 48-82.
    7. Mendoza Alcantara, Alejandra & Woolcock, Michael, 2014. "Integrating qualitative methods into investment climate impact evaluations," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7145, The World Bank.
    8. McKenzie, David, 2012. "Beyond baseline and follow-up: The case for more T in experiments," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 210-221.
    9. Maru, Yiheyis Taddele & Sparrow, Ashley & Butler, James R.A. & Banerjee, Onil & Ison, Ray & Hall, Andy & Carberry, Peter, 2018. "Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “Theory of Change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 344-353.
    10. Tannahill, Carol & Sridharan, Sanjeev, 2013. "Getting real about policy and practice needs: Evaluation as a bridge between the problem and solution space," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 157-164.
    11. Daoud, Adel & Herlitz, Anders & Subramanian, S.V., 2022. "IMF fairness: Calibrating the policies of the International Monetary Fund based on distributive justice," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    12. Arndt, Channing & Jones, Sam & Tarp, Finn, 2015. "Assessing Foreign Aid’s Long-Run Contribution to Growth and Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 6-18.
    13. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2011. "Ten steps to making evaluation matter," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 135-146, May.
    14. Rao, Vijayendra & Ananthpur, Kripa & Malik, Kabir, 2017. "The Anatomy of Failure: An Ethnography of a Randomized Trial to Deepen Democracy in Rural India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 481-497.
    15. Donovan, Kevin P., 2018. "The rise of the randomistas: on the experimental turn in international aid," SocArXiv xygzb, Center for Open Science.
    16. Sara Nadel and Lant Pritchett, 2016. "Searching for the Devil in the Details: Learning about Development Program Design," Working Papers 434, Center for Global Development.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bwp:bwppap:7309. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Rowena Harding (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wpmanuk.html .

    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.