Development of South Africa’s national evaluation policy and system 2011−2014

Abstract

There is a growing recognition of the complex relationship between evaluation and research, and policy and practice. Policy making is inherently political, and public administration is contingent on various factors, that is budgets, capabilities and systems other than evidence. This has evolved in the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluations (DPME) in South Africa challenging conventional ideas of communication between evaluators and policymakers and practitioners. These are characterised by monologues from evaluators to policymakers and practitioners, which are reserved exclusively for communicating the finished product. This article is a reflection of the emerging work of the DPME valuations which is investigating the relational dynamics between evaluators and programme personnel, and encouraging more interactive and diversified communication throughout the evaluation process. The article offers a public sector observation. The lessons and implications can be useful, firstly to other countries establishing evaluation systems, and also those who have an interest in enhancing the use of evidence by government agencies in developing countries.

How relationship and dialogue facilitate evidence use: Lessons from African countries

“…This is supported by Sherriff et al (2019) who also found that involvement of diverse stakeholders in research processes increased appreciation of the process and the outcomes. Also, research into the South African DPME evaluation system found that involving policymakers in the evaluation process increased integration of experiences and knowledge from implementation in the interpretation of evaluation findings and produced more actionable recommendations (Amisi 2015). Creating space for collaborative management of the evidence generation process can build on existing relationships in a sector and facilitate new ones as people get to know each other over the course of the evidence journey.…”

“…Yet, to effectively ensure use of knowledge generated through these different tools requires an understanding of the policy environment. It is not possible for those producing evidence to have all the knowledge of the policymaking departments (Amisi 2015;Stewart et al 2019). At the same time, policy actors and implementers cannot be expected to have expertise in all evidence-generation processes.…”

“…In addition, knowledge generation is not the sole domain of researchers (Weber et al 2014). Policymakers and implementers also hold knowledge and expertise that researchers may not possess, and this knowledge and experience is important not only in the uptake of research but also in how research evidence is generated (Amisi 2015;Stewart, Dyal & Langer 2017). Evidence use is increasingly viewed as a social process, aided by processes that promote information flows between individuals and organisations, and by the collective interpretation of existing knowledge (Amisi, Buthelezi & Magangoe 2020;Rickinson & Edwards 2021).…”