<i>Ex Ante</i> and <i>Ex Post</i> Evaluations: Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Mergaert, Lut; Minto, Rachel

doi:10.1017/s1867299x0000427x

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous research has highlighted differing levels of institutional importance attached to evaluation and gender mainstreaming in the Commission (Mergaert and Minto 2015). This current article expands on this finding, investigating how far these two governance initiatives have been institutionalized within the European bureaucracy.…”

Section: Gauging Institutionalizationmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Our comparative cases (evaluation and gender mainstreaming) were selected because of the different levels of institutional importance they enjoy within the Commission (Mergaert and Minto 2015), with evaluation holding a more privileged status. Policy evaluation and gender mainstreaming entered European governance in the 1980s and 1990s, respectively.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is worth noting that the constitutionalized commitment to gender mainstreaming requires the mainstreaming of gender in the practice of policy evaluation itself, for example, in the guidelines for ex ante and ex post evaluation, in the terms of reference, and ultimately in the evaluation reports. Previous research highlights that gender has not been comprehensively mainstreamed into policy evaluation(Mergaert and Minto 2015), which is demonstrable of a resistance to mainstreaming gender. A lack of resources for gender mainstreaming within the Commission and competition with other crosscutting concerns have been highlighted as two factors working against gender mainstreaming.3 We suggest that if gender had indeed been effectively mainstreamed through the process of evaluation, evaluation itself might not have been so comprehensively institutionalized in the Commission.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is an example of The layered structure in place merely acts as a hook or platform for the promotion of gender mainstreaming by those who are willing to take action, leaving the realization of concrete outcomes dependent on agency. While this is not the ideal scenario for gender mainstreaming, keeping gender equality present within the governance architecture of the Commission at the very least leaves the door open to future initiatives.Previous research has highlighted that evaluation has been more or less impervious to gender mainstreaming(Mergaert and Minto 2015). While gender is not wholly absent from the practice of evaluation in the European Commission, gender has not been integrated within either ex ante(Mergaert and Minto 2015;Smismans and Minto 2016) or ex post(Mergaert and Minto 2015) evaluation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Gender mainstreaming and evaluation in the EU: comparative perspectives from feminist institutionalism

Minto

Mergaert

2018

International Feminist Journal of Politics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a focused comparative analysis of the institutionalization of two governance practices in the European Commission that levy distinct challenges to the gender status quo: gender mainstreaming (which overtly challenges gender bias) and evaluation (which does not have explicit feminist aspirations). With reference to five dimensions, we identify evaluation as relatively strongly institutionalized, and gender mainstreaming as relatively weakly institutionalized. We draw on the explanatory power of feminist institutionalism to unpack these findings, arguing that a feminist institutional perspective can shed light on this variation, as it provides greater insight into the formal and informal institutions that constrain, enable and shape the implementation of evaluation and gender mainstreaming. We assert that the notion of path dependency, the logic of appropriateness, and the concept of layering serve as useful tools to understand the gendered nature of the European Commission. This research provides insights into the institutional factors that impact the implementation of gender equality strategies (such as gender mainstreaming). In turn, this contributes to the development of more effective strategies to promote institutional change toward greater equality.

show abstract

Section: Gauging Institutionalizationmentioning

confidence: 77%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Gender mainstreaming and evaluation in the EU: comparative perspectives from feminist institutionalism

Minto

Mergaert

2018

International Feminist Journal of Politics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The scientific system relies on evidence, but that essential logic does not seem to facilitate the incorporation of a gender perspective, and perceptions continue to be dominated by strong beliefs and stereotypes [26]. However, some positive effects of the evaluation of research and innovation (R&I) policies has been observed in gender issues [27].…”

Section: Equality Policies In Sandt In the Eu And Spainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Equality Indicators for Research and Innovation from a Responsible Perspective: The Case of Spain

Otero-Hermida

García‐Melón

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article offers a Spanish national perspective that contributes to European Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) monitoring initiatives. National experts involved in gender and science and technology issues, such as policymakers, gender experts, research institutions, and equality associations, among others, have proposed indicators based on participatory decision-making techniques. The results include a complete set of 52 indicators and a reduced panel of 23 indicators—the highest-ranked ones—to monitor relevant aspects that should be measured in gender dimension from an RRI perspective: differential and asymmetric socialization and education, organizational culture, substantive representation, vertical segregation, work relations, visibility of women researchers, gender perspective in research contents, gender expertise enhancement, and resources. The results offer new indicators that differ from previous indicator panels at the European and Spanish levels in relation to those aspects that should be measured and the typology of indicators preferred. Differences suggest the need for a more nuanced debate on the purpose of indicators, and the need for national contributions to RRI and to the debate on gender perspective in EU policy. Finally, the article suggests some specific traits observed in Spain that might add to the debate on the content of an RRI gender perspective in an already developed gender policy.

show abstract

Towards a Regulatory Cycle? The Use of Evaluative Information in Impact Assessments and Ex–post Evaluations in the European Union

Golen

Voorst

2016

Eur. j. risk regul.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a part of its Better Regulation agenda, the European Commission increasingly stresses the link between different types of regulatory evaluations. Predictions made by Impact Assessments (IAs) could be verified during ex–post legislative evaluations, while ex–post evaluations in turn could recommend amendments to be studied in future IAs. This article combines a dataset of 309 ex–post legislative evaluations (2000-2014) and a dataset of 225 IAs of legislative updates (2003-2014) to show how many ex–post evaluations of the Commission use IAs and vice versa. This way, it explores if the Commission's rhetoric of a ‘regulatory cycle’ holds up in practice. Building on the literature of evaluation use, we formulate the hypotheses that the timeliness, quality and focus of the IAs and evaluations are key explanations for use. Our results show that so far only ten ex–post evaluations have used IAs of EU legislation, while thirty three IAs have used ex–post legislative evaluations. Using Fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis, we find that timeliness is a necessary condition of the use of ex–post evaluations by IAs, suggesting that for the regulatory cycle to function properly, it is crucial to complete an ex–post evaluation before an IA is launched. Future research could repeat our analysis for evaluations of non–regulatory activities or study the causal mechanisms behind our findings.

show abstract

Ex Ante and Ex Post Evaluations: Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Cited by 9 publications

References 13 publications

Gender mainstreaming and evaluation in the EU: comparative perspectives from feminist institutionalism

Gender mainstreaming and evaluation in the EU: comparative perspectives from feminist institutionalism

Gender Equality Indicators for Research and Innovation from a Responsible Perspective: The Case of Spain

Towards a Regulatory Cycle? The Use of Evaluative Information in Impact Assessments and Ex–post Evaluations in the European Union

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About