The central questions of this article are when, how and what do governmental agencies learn from evaluations. A structural constructivist theoretical framework is developed and applied to two case studies, both of which take a report by the Dutch Court of Audit (CoA) as a starting point. A reconstruction is made of the intra-and interorganizational processes through which the impacts of these evaluations were socially constructed. It appears that an evaluation has hardly any direct effect that can be unequivocally ascribed to it. Rather, evaluations seem to support or counteract debates, tendencies and options already present (or 'under construction') in the interaction among the actors involved. Using a structural constructivist theoretical framework we identify mechanisms and conditions that enhance forms of learning processes.This article concludes with some hypotheses about the genesis of evaluation impact. Evaluation

Two main functions of evaluation are to enable accountability and collective learning.Both of these -and their combination -run into divers complications when applied in complex multi-actor policy processes. The article explores these complications and illustrates these with examples from the field of spatial policy. In doing so a third function of evaluation in such contexts is identified, viz. evaluation as an instrument of cooperation. Next, a number of theoretical ideas, supported by empirical research, are proposed in order to understand better when, why and how evaluation contribute to complex multi-actor policy processes. Based on these insights some principles are elaborated for the development of constructive evaluation arrangements. It is suggested that cooperation is a precondition for preservation of accountability and learning functions of evaluation in multi-actor settings.

The pace of societal change and the development of societal challenges have speeded up considerably during the last couple of decades, with substantial impact on different levels, i.e. ranging from global to local, or from business to government. When focusing on the public domain, these changes and challenges have had a major impact on public professionals, who face different and frequently changing questions. Mid-career programs in Public Administration (MPA) have the mission to support enrolled professionals in dealing with these changes and challenges. This article is about the development of such MPAs. Both substantive and didactic development is needed. To counter institutional inertia it seems vital to institutionalize a regular rethinking and adaptation of curricula and didactic strategies. This article identified some important points of attention and some options to deal with these in order to continuously improve the contribution of MPA programs to relevant and effective professional development and ongoing professional learning.

No abstract

No abstract