Joint (ad)ventures and (in)credible journeys evaluating innovation: asset-based community development in Ethiopia

Abstract

Acknowledging debates about what constitutes effective and useful evaluation practice, this paper explores the particular challenges of evaluating an innovative approach to community development for multiple stakeholders with different interests and different levels of confidence in particular evaluation methodologies. The innovation -applying an Asset Based approach to Community Development (ABCD) in an Ethiopian context -presents further challenges to evaluation because of its open-ended nature and problems of attribution. On the other hand, the culture of risk-taking encouraged by the supporters of innovation provides the space for genuine lessons to be learnt about failure as well as success.Reconnaissant les débats sur ce qui constitue des pratiques d'évaluation efficaces et utiles, cet article examine les défis particuliers associés à l'évaluation d'une approche innovante du développement communautaire pour des parties prenantes multiples avec différents intérêts et différents niveaux de confiance dans des méthodologies d'évaluation précises. L'innovation -l'application d'une approche basée sur les biens du développement communautaire (Asset Based approach to Community Development -ABCD) dans un contexte éthiopien -présente des défis supplémentaires pour l'évaluation du fait de sa nature ouverte et des problèmes relatifs à l'attribution. D'un autre côté, la culture de prise de risques encouragée par les partisans de l'innovation donne la possibilité de tirer de véritables enseignements en ce qui concerne l'échec, ainsi que le succès.El presente artículo reconoce la existencia de debates en torno a qué es lo que constituye una práctica de evaluación efectiva y útil; además, examina los retos particulares asociados a la evaluación de un método innovador de desarrollo comunitario dirigido hacia numerosos actores cuyos intereses son distintos y que, a la vez, expresan diferentes grados de confianza en múltiples metodologías de evaluación. El método innovador, consistente en la aplicación del "enfoque de desarrollo comunitario basado en los activos" (ABCD) a un contexto de Etiopía, encierra retos adicionales para la realización de evaluaciones, debido a su naturaleza abierta y a los problemas de atribución. Sin embargo, los partidarios de la innovación fomentan una cultura de asunción de riesgos que, a su vez, crea el espacio en el cual los participantes pueden tener aprendizajes tanto de aquellos casos en los que hayan tenido éxito como de aquellos en los que hayan fracasado.

Identities, interests, and preferences matter: Fostering sustainable community development by building assets and agency in western Kenya

“…Beyond the quantitative data, we collect a range of qualitative information about farmer perceptions and satisfaction based on qualitative methods proposed by the Coady Institute (Mathie & Peters, ; Peters, Gonsamo, & Molla, ).…”

“…The ABCD approach has been taken up by partners in various contexts and countries on all continents for the past 15 years (Peters, Mathie, & Legesse, ). Although initially developed by the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University in Illinois, USA based on lessons drawn from observing marginalized groups that organically overcame poverty in the absence of external assistance (Kretzmann & McKnight, , ), the Coady Institute has successfully adapted ABCD to a context of externally supported but nonetheless community‐based development work (Coady International Institute, ; Mathie, Cameron, & Gibson, ; Mathie & Peters, ). ABCD is not new as such, but its innovation lies in providing a framework for appreciating that communities have been driving their own development in the absence of usually well‐meaning external actors since time immemorial.…”

Re-inventing Community Development: Utilizing Relational Networking and Cultural Assets for Infrastructure Provision

“…Further, people take responsibility, initiative and leadership, remain owners and directors of the change process. Mathie and Cunningham [2] aver that communities can self-evaluate and drive the development process themselves. It hypothesized when this happens, then outcomes will be sustained, and people will become more self-reliant [30,3].…”

“…The recognition of strengths is more likely to inspire positive action rather than a focus on huge problems that cannot be resolved. The logical consequences of focusing on assets and capabilities enables a proactive role for the citizen, replacing the passive, dependent role of the client in welfare service delivery model of community development practice [2,8].…”

“…Development outcomes are determined by the environment and gamut of natural resources or assets including individuals, associations and institutions [2,5,31]. It is argued that focusing on strengths is motivating [22], nurturing existing capacity and strengths will expand and contribute to a positive change process [32].…”