The new scalar politics of evaluation

An emerging governance role for evaluation

David Rutkowski, Jason Sparks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this article we analyze how roles for evaluation are described and argued for in key texts produced and/or promoted by three influential international networks: the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness; the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Assistance Committee’s Network on Development Evaluation; and the Network of Networks for Impact Evaluation. We contend that these complex multilateral networks are working supranationally through soft power to promote: common standards of evaluation practice; a dominant model of evaluation (impact evaluation); and new evaluation roles, relationships and practices for the field of development. Moreover, we argue that this emerging complex multilateral agenda for evaluation may position evaluation and evaluators within a global governance strategy allowing greater influence to international development organizations. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of the analysis for evaluators working in the field of international development.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)492-508
Number of pages17
JournalEvaluation
Volume20
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 12 2014

Fingerprint

politics
governance
evaluation
global governance
OECD
aid
assistance

Keywords

  • complex multilateralism
  • evaluation standards
  • global governance
  • impact evaluation
  • international development
  • soft power

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Development

Cite this

The new scalar politics of evaluation : An emerging governance role for evaluation. / Rutkowski, David; Sparks, Jason.

In: Evaluation, Vol. 20, No. 4, 12.10.2014, p. 492-508.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3f55d3c190054f749e6292585c1c9ced,
title = "The new scalar politics of evaluation: An emerging governance role for evaluation",
abstract = "In this article we analyze how roles for evaluation are described and argued for in key texts produced and/or promoted by three influential international networks: the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness; the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Assistance Committee’s Network on Development Evaluation; and the Network of Networks for Impact Evaluation. We contend that these complex multilateral networks are working supranationally through soft power to promote: common standards of evaluation practice; a dominant model of evaluation (impact evaluation); and new evaluation roles, relationships and practices for the field of development. Moreover, we argue that this emerging complex multilateral agenda for evaluation may position evaluation and evaluators within a global governance strategy allowing greater influence to international development organizations. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of the analysis for evaluators working in the field of international development.",
keywords = "complex multilateralism, evaluation standards, global governance, impact evaluation, international development, soft power",
author = "David Rutkowski and Jason Sparks",
year = "2014",
month = "10",
day = "12",
doi = "10.1177/1356389014550561",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "492--508",
journal = "Evaluation",
issn = "1356-3890",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The new scalar politics of evaluation

T2 - An emerging governance role for evaluation

AU - Rutkowski, David

AU - Sparks, Jason

PY - 2014/10/12

Y1 - 2014/10/12

N2 - In this article we analyze how roles for evaluation are described and argued for in key texts produced and/or promoted by three influential international networks: the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness; the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Assistance Committee’s Network on Development Evaluation; and the Network of Networks for Impact Evaluation. We contend that these complex multilateral networks are working supranationally through soft power to promote: common standards of evaluation practice; a dominant model of evaluation (impact evaluation); and new evaluation roles, relationships and practices for the field of development. Moreover, we argue that this emerging complex multilateral agenda for evaluation may position evaluation and evaluators within a global governance strategy allowing greater influence to international development organizations. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of the analysis for evaluators working in the field of international development.

AB - In this article we analyze how roles for evaluation are described and argued for in key texts produced and/or promoted by three influential international networks: the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness; the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Assistance Committee’s Network on Development Evaluation; and the Network of Networks for Impact Evaluation. We contend that these complex multilateral networks are working supranationally through soft power to promote: common standards of evaluation practice; a dominant model of evaluation (impact evaluation); and new evaluation roles, relationships and practices for the field of development. Moreover, we argue that this emerging complex multilateral agenda for evaluation may position evaluation and evaluators within a global governance strategy allowing greater influence to international development organizations. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of the analysis for evaluators working in the field of international development.

KW - complex multilateralism

KW - evaluation standards

KW - global governance

KW - impact evaluation

KW - international development

KW - soft power

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908661568&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84908661568&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1356389014550561

DO - 10.1177/1356389014550561

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 492

EP - 508

JO - Evaluation

JF - Evaluation

SN - 1356-3890

IS - 4

ER -