The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) promotes evidence-informed equitable, inclusive and sustainable development. We support the generation and effective use of high-quality evidence to inform decision-making and improve the lives of people living in poverty in low-and middle-income countries. We provide guidance and support to produce, synthesise and quality assure evidence of what works, for whom, how, why and at what cost. 3ie evidence gap map reports 3ie evidence gap maps are thematic collections of information about impact evaluations or systematic reviews that measure the effects of international development policies and programmes. The maps provide a visual display of completed and ongoing systematic reviews and impact evaluations in a sector or sub-sector, structured around a framework of interventions and outcomes. The evidence gap map reports provide all the supporting documentation for the maps, including the background information for the theme of the map, the methods and results, protocols, and the analysis of results. About this evidence gap map report This report provides the supporting documentation for the 3ie evidence gap map on the effect of transparency and accountability interventions in the extractive sector, developed as a part of a project funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
This paper discusses the methodological, ethical and practical constraints relating to the use of big data for measuring and evaluating development outcomes. The paper presents the analysis of a systematic gap map developed by 3ie. The map included 437 studies, comprising impact evaluations, systematic reviews and big data measurement studies.
The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is an international grant-making nongovernment organisation promoting evidence-informed development policies and programmes. We are the global leader in funding and producing high-quality evidence of what works, how, why and at what cost. We believe that better and policy-relevant evidence will make development more effective and improve people's lives. 3ie working papers These papers cover a range of content. They may focus on current issues, debates and enduring challenges facing development policymakers and practitioners and the impact evaluation and systematic review communities. Policy-relevant papers draw on relevant findings from impact evaluations and systematic reviews funded by 3ie, as well as other rigorous evidence to offer insights, new analyses, findings and recommendations. Papers focusing on methods and technical guides also draw on similar sources to help advance understanding, design and use of rigorous and appropriate evaluations and reviews. 3ie also uses this series to publish lessons learned from 3ie grant-making. About this working paper This paper, 3ie evidence gap maps: a starting point for strategic evidence production and use provides a conceptual introduction to and demonstration of the evidence gap maps that 3ie produces and their various applications. It outlines the methods for conducting evidence gap maps, but does not go into detail. 3ie will also produce separate guidance about how to create an evidence gap map in 2017. Funding for this impact evaluation was provided by 3ie's donors, which include UK Aid, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. A complete listing of 3ie's donors is on the 3ie website.
Background Policy makers need access to reliable data to monitor and evaluate the progress of development outcomes and targets such as sustainable development outcomes (SDGs). However, significant data and evidence gaps remain. Lack of resources, limited capacity within governments and logistical difficulties in collecting data are some of the reasons for the data gaps. Big data—that is digitally generated, passively produced and automatically collected—offers a great potential for answering some of the data needs. Satellite and sensors, mobile phone call detail records, online transactions and search data, and social media are some of the examples of big data. Integrating big data with the traditional household surveys and administrative data can complement data availability, quality, granularity, accuracy and frequency, and help measure development outcomes temporally and spatially in a number of new ways.The study maps different sources of big data onto development outcomes (based on SDGs) to identify current evidence base, use and the gaps. The map provides a visual overview of existing and ongoing studies. This study also discusses the risks, biases and ethical challenges in using big data for measuring and evaluating development outcomes. The study is a valuable resource for evaluators, researchers, funders, policymakers and practitioners in their effort to contributing to evidence informed policy making and in achieving the SDGs. Objectives Identify and appraise rigorous impact evaluations (IEs), systematic reviews and the studies that have innovatively used big data to measure any development outcomes with special reference to difficult contexts Search Methods A number of general and specialised data bases and reporsitories of organisations were searched using keywords related to big data by an information specialist. Selection Criteria The studies were selected on basis of whether they used big data sources to measure or evaluate development outcomes. Data Collection and Analysis Data collection was conducted using a data extraction tool and all extracted data was entered into excel and then analysed using Stata. The data analysis involved looking at trends and descriptive statistics only. Main Results The search yielded over 17,000 records, which we then screened down to 437 studies which became the foundation of our systematic map. We found that overall, there is a sizable and rapidly growing number of measurement studies using big data but a much smaller number of IEs. We also see that the bulk of the big data sources are machine‐generated (mostly satellites) represented in the light blue. We find that satellite data was used in over 70% of the measurement studies and in over 80% of the IEs. Authors' Conclusions This map gives us a sense that there is a lot of work being done to develop appropriate measures using big data which could subsequently be used in IEs. Information on costs, ethics, transparency is lacking in the studies and more work is needed in this area to understand the efficaci...
'Development evaluations in Uganda 2000–2018: A Country Evaluation Map' is a CEDIL Synthesis Working Paper. It is a report on the first of its kind country evaluation map for a single country. The map identifies 617 evaluations in multiple sectors. Nearly 60 per cent of the studies contain process evaluation evidence and over 40 per cent are impact evaluations. The map helps make visible recent development evaluations from the country, identifies potential gaps in knowledge and opportunities for evidence synthesis. Users can submit studies for inclusion in the map, thus giving the map a repository function.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.