Aid at the frontier: building knowledge collectively

Levine, Ruth; Savedoff, William D.

doi:10.1080/19439342.2015.1068354

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Development agencies already pursue a plethora of different tasks today and have varied strengths in addressing them. Whereas some agencies will continue to pursue a role in implementing programs and projects in developing countries, others may increasingly emphasize their knowledge generation and dissemination functions and diminish their financial or operational roles (Levine & Savedoff, ). In addition to knowledge, advisory, or financing functions, the tasks of agencies of the future may relate to geographical areas of intervention, sectoral specialization, or their role in intergovernmental relations as entities facilitating coordination among varied bureaucracies.…”

Section: Discussion: the Future Of Development Agenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development agencies of the future: The limits of adaptation

Lundsgaarde

Fejerskov

2018

Public Admin & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The analysis of the future of development agencies commonly adopts a view that the adaptability of agencies to a set of external challenges in the global development landscape determines their fitness for the future. This article offers alternative entry points for reflections on the future role of development agencies in managing global challenges. It argues that recent analysis focusing on agency adaptation has two key limitations. First, it does not adequately account for the existing diversity of organizational forms and the differences in the functions that development agencies assume.Second, it does not acknowledge that agency adaptation can reflect organizational dynamics involving the pursuit of sustained legitimacy rather than a rational response to external challenges. As a consequence, agencies encouraged to change in order to maintain relevance may extend their engagement to areas where they lack expertise, implying a tradeoff between organizational adaptation and effectiveness. The article concludes that further analysis of possible trajectories for development agencies should emphasize the place of organizations within a domestic and international division of labor and the varied strengths of current organizational alternatives to orient future decisions on how to invest in the infrastructure for global cooperation. KEYWORDS aid effectiveness, bureaucracy, development agencies, development aid, future of development cooperation, organizational change

show abstract

Section: Discussion: the Future Of Development Agenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development agencies of the future: The limits of adaptation

Lundsgaarde

Fejerskov

2018

Public Admin & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Examples of evaluations employing ToC analysis are found in assessments of most blended finance instruments and mechanisms, including equity and debt (Ogunforwora, 2020[54]; PIDG, 2020 [55]; IFC, 2020 [39]; Jackson, 2013 [56]), guarantees (Carnegie Consult, 2016 [42]; Hansen, Rand and Winckler Andersen, 2020 [40]; USAID, 2013 [43]), development impact bonds (Joynes, 2019[57]), performance-based grants (Jackson and Alvarez, 2018 [58]) and structured funds (Koenig and Jackson, 2016 [22]; Orth et al, 2020 [59]).…”

Section: Approaches and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating blended finance instruments and mechanisms

Habbel

Jackson

Orth

et al. 2021

OECD Development Co-Operation Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…KFEs contributed to a shift away from an input/output paradigm, which tracks resources used and deliverables produced to judge success, to a paradigm focused on outcomes and causal attribution. This shift continues, and remains one of the crucial contributions of KFEs to global development practice (Levine et al 2015). Several development practitioners interviewed for this paper remarked that implementers are becoming increasingly conversant in evaluation concepts; other respondents highlighted increasingly serious approaches to impact measurement among pioneering funders such as the UK Department for International Development (DfID), the Development Impact Ventures initiative of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Global Innovation Fund.…”

Section: Channel 2: Influencing Development Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Academic publications reward the novelty of the intervention being tested, relevance to development theory and use of innovative methodologies, incentivising researchers to push implementers towards evaluations with these characteristics. In contrast, policymakers and practitioners tend to want evidence on operational topics that may seem mundane to researchers (Dhaliwal et al n.d.;Levine et al 2015). In a 2011 interview, Dean Karlan acknowledged the divergent priorities of researchers and implementers, noting there are 'tests that are not academically interesting but…”

Section: Weak Link 1: Differing Evaluator and Implementer Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluations with impact: decision-focused impact evaluation as a practical policymaking tool

Shah¹,

IDinsight²,

Wang³

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is an international grant-making NGO promoting evidence-informed development policies and programmes. We are the global leader in funding and in 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 papersThese papers focus on current issues, debates and enduring challenges facing development policymakers and practitioners and the impact evaluation and systematic reviews communities. Policy-relevant papers draw on findings from impact evaluations and systematic reviews funded by 3ie, as well as findings from other credible and rigorous evaluations and reviews, to offer insights, new analyses, findings and recommendations. Papers focusing on methods also draw on similar sources to help advance understanding, design and use of rigorous and appropriate evaluations and reviews. About this working paperThis paper was commissioned by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation to provide a perspective on the future of impact evaluation, based on IDinsight's work using rigorous impact evaluation as a practical decision-making tool for policymakers and non-governmental organisations in developing countries. The goal of this paper is to articulate how impact evaluations can achieve their full potential to improve social programmes in the developing world. All of the content is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not represent the opinions of 3ie, its donors or its Board of Commissioners. Any errors and omissions are also the sole responsibility of the authors. Any comments or queries should be directed to the corresponding author, Neil Buddy Shah, Neil.buddy.shah@idinsight.org. AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation for funding this paper, and in particular, Kristen Stelljes and Sarah Lucas from the Hewlett Foundation for their useful comments throughout the process of writing the paper. We would like to thank Annette Brown, Emmanuel Jimenez, Jo Puri, and anonymous reviewers from the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) for their comments. We would like to acknowledge all of our colleagues at IDinsight, especially Ronald Abraham, Heather Lanthorn, Jeffery McManus and Esther Wang, whose perspectives and experiences were integral in writing this paper. Finally, we are grateful for the insightful thoughts from the numerous policymakers, donors, and NGO leaders who were generous in giving us their time to be interviewed for this paper.ii Executive summaryImpact evaluations have enhanced international development discourse and thinking over the past 15 years, but the full promise of impact evaluations to improve lives has yet to be realised.Rigorous impact evaluations to date have largely focused on contributing to a global learning agenda. These 'knowledge-focused evaluations' (KFEs) -i.e. those primarily designed to build global knowledge about de...

show abstract

Aid at the frontier: building knowledge collectively

Cited by 11 publications

References 21 publications

Development agencies of the future: The limits of adaptation

Development agencies of the future: The limits of adaptation

Evaluating blended finance instruments and mechanisms

Evaluations with impact: decision-focused impact evaluation as a practical policymaking tool

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About