Evaluators in the Anthropocene

Brousselle, Astrid; McDavid, J. Bradley

doi:10.1177/1356389020911060

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Climate change, only one aspect of the ecological crisis, is considered the most important threat to humanity (Watts et al 2015). Our populations prepare to live with natural phenomena such as floods, fires, pest infestations, but also with increased risks to health, livelihoods, biodiversity, and with mass migrations and increased social fractures (Brousselle and McDavid 2020; IPCC 2019, 2018; Watts et al 2015).…”

Section: More Crises To Come: Managing Risk and Fostering Resilience mentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond COVID‐19: Five commentaries on reimagining governance for future crises and resilience

Brousselle¹,

Brunet‐Jailly²,

Kennedy³

et al. 2020

Can Public Adm

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several Canadian and international scholars offer commentaries on the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for governments and public service institutions, and fruitful directions for public administration research and practice. This second suite of commentaries considers the challenges confronting governments as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the decades to come with an increasingly broad lens: the need to understand and rethink the architecture of the state given recent and future challenges awaiting governments; the need to rethink government-civil society relations and policies to deliver services for increasingly diverse citizens and communities; the need for new repertoires and sensibilities on the part of governments for recognizing, anticipating, and engaging on governance risks despite imperfect expert knowledge and public skepticism; how the COVID-19 crisis has caused us to reconceive international and sub-national borders where new "borders" are being drawn; and the need to anticipate a steady stream of crises similar to the COVID-19 pandemic arising from climate change and related challenges, and develop new national and international governance strategies for fostering population and community resilience. Sommaire : Plusieurs universitaires canadiens et internationaux ont offert des suggestions sur les implications de la pandémie du COVID-19 pour les gouvernements et les institutions de la fonction publique, ainsi que des orientations futures pour la recherche et la pratique en administration publique. Cette deuxième série de commentaires examine les défis que devront affronter les gouvernements en raison de la pandémie de COVID-19 et dans les décennies à venir, dans une optique large. Cette série souligne le besoin de comprendre et de repenser l'architecture de l'État, de revoir les relations entre le gouvernement et la société civile pour fournir des services à des citoyens et des communautés de plus en plus divers, d'élaborer de nouvelles façons d'identifier et d'anticiper les risques, et de s'engager malgré

show abstract

Section: More Crises To Come: Managing Risk and Fostering Resilience mentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond COVID‐19: Five commentaries on reimagining governance for future crises and resilience

Brousselle¹,

Brunet‐Jailly²,

Kennedy³

et al. 2020

Can Public Adm

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Environmental challenges we are facing reflect the fact that many are global commons and we do not have international bodies with the authority to enforce coordinated action. Pollution or climate change, for example, does not respect countries’ boundaries (Brousselle and McDavid, 2020) and, in fact, countries that have larger impacts often have a greater capacity for adaptation, whereas countries that contribute less to environmental changes are often those that are most exposed to impacts of environmental changes and have less capacity to adapt. We also observe that for some international agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, there is no capacity beyond moral suasion to oblige countries to respect their commitments, and we even see some signatories considering their withdrawal.…”

Section: Conceptualizing Relevant Dimensions Of the Human Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We know that economic, social, technological, and legal solutions to this crisis exist in all sectors, including food and energy systems, transportation, industries, buildings, and land use planning (Brousselle and McDavid, 2020). There are also several international commitments: in 2015, 194 States and the European Union ratified the Paris Agreement to meet climate-related targets; the UN has declared and supports 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which include several related to natural systems such as climate action, life under water, and life on land.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation for planetary health

Brousselle

McDavid

2020

Evaluation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are currently being challenged to urgently address the environmental crisis. Intervening in this complex ecology creates the need to adopt approaches that will reconcile natural and human systems, approaches for Planetary Health. In this article, we present a Planetary Health Framework as a conceptual dialogic approach for designing and evaluating interventions. Natural and human systems dimensions have been conceptualized in an integrated way, based on existing scientific knowledge. This framework is intended to be applied using a dialogic approach. We will also show, schematically, how the use of this approach can be overlaid on each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. The overall aim of this article is to contribute to a transformation in our field, to expand our role from existing narrowly focused evaluation practices to taking into account in our work, how interventions do or do not make a contribution to building a better future for all.

show abstract

“…First, there is the opposition between evaluating an intervention and evaluating the larger entity in which it is located (Renger et al, 2020), that is, two different evaluands, at different scales. This can also imply the opposition between any kind of program and those that mainly address climate change (Brousselle and Mc David, 2020). Most recently, especially in sustainable development evaluation, we see advocacy of a systems perspective, argued to be an appropriate response to the challenges of climate change and the Anthropocene.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Program, complexity, and system when evaluating sustainable development

Stame

2022

Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In light of the challenges of the Anthropocene, it is common today for evaluators to propose a systems rather than a program perspective. A program perspective is reproached for its simplicity and linearity, while the systems perspective is praised for its ability to account for complexity and emergence. This article argues that even before the systems perspective appeared on the horizon, the story of program evaluation had been characterized by a confrontation between “simplifiers” and “complexifiers.” It enquires into the lessons that the complexifiers of the evaluation of programs have handed on to evaluators who are facing the current challenges of sustainable development. On the other hand, when analyzing what a systems perspective contributes, the article is alert to the risk that a “holistic” view may ignore lessons complexifiers have to offer. This argument is supported by considering the way in which a systems perspective is understood in the practice of evaluation. Conclusions invite readers to overcome a misleading opposition between the two perspectives and indicate possible cross-fertilization across different units of analysis and approaches.

show abstract

Evaluators in the Anthropocene

Cited by 9 publications

References 47 publications

Beyond COVID‐19: Five commentaries on reimagining governance for future crises and resilience

Beyond COVID‐19: Five commentaries on reimagining governance for future crises and resilience

Evaluation for planetary health

Program, complexity, and system when evaluating sustainable development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About