Integrating Value for Money and Impact Evaluations: Issues, Institutions, and Opportunities

Brown, Elizabeth D.; Tanner, Jeffery

doi:10.1596/1813-9450-9041

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These studies often do not incorporate cost analyses. Indeed recent estimates suggest just 15%–18% of impact analyses include any kind of cost analysis (Brown & Tanner, 2019). This under‐reporting of cost in conjunction with IE leads to very small samples from which to draw inferences about the cost, and cost‐effectiveness of development interventions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of community engagement interventions to improve child immunisation in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Jain

Shisler

Lane

et al. 2022

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immunisation is one of the most cost-effective interventions to prevent and control life-threatening infectious diseases. Nonetheless, rates of routine vaccination of children in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) are strikingly low or stagnant.In 2019, an estimated 19.7 million infants did not receive routine immunisations.Community engagement interventions are increasingly being emphasised in international and national policy frameworks as a means to improve immunisation coverage and reach marginalised communities. This systematic review examines the

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of community engagement interventions to improve child immunisation in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Jain

Shisler

Lane

et al. 2022

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cost information will be tabulated and synthesised narratively with descriptions of details of the different approaches used to derive intervention costs also provided. Estimates show only around 15% of impact evaluations report information about intervention costs (see Brown & Tanner, 2019). Reflecting that it is likely that information on intervention costs will be limited, where possible, we will contact study authors and funders of interventions to try to retrieve further information.…”

Section: Analysis Of Intervention Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

PROTOCOL: The effects of agricultural output market access interventions on agricultural, socio‐economic and food and nutrition security outcomes in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review

Villar,

Kozakiewicz,

Bachina

et al. 2023

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development agencies and international donors’ efforts are increasingly focusing on better integrating poor and remote farmers into agricultural markets to address the chronic issues of rural poverty and hunger in low‐ and middle‐income countries. Using systematic methods for information retrieval, critical appraisal and evidence synthesis, this research aims to examine evidence on the effects of five focal types of agricultural market access interventions: (i) farm‐to‐market transport infrastructure interventions; (ii) output market information interventions; (iii) initiatives creating new marketplaces and alternative marketing opportunities; (iv) contract farming initiatives; (v) interventions improving storage infrastructure. In this review, we will study evidence of the magnitude and direction of intervention effects on agricultural, socio‐economic, and food and nutrition security outcomes. We will examine evidence of the distribution of reported effects across different contexts, interventions and sub‐groups of the population (e.g., according to sex, socio‐economic status, farm size, etc.). We will also report on included studies’ risk of bias and on what evidence is available on intervention costs, or their cost‐effectiveness. This protocol outlines this review's planned methods and the criteria for selecting and including studies in its analysis.

show abstract

“…Ex-post cost-benefit analyses of interventions are increasingly common (Brown and Tanner 2019). These tools could be adapted to provide informed ex-ante approximations of costs and benefits across different experimental designs, thereby guiding decisions of whether to undertake the study.…”

Section: Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field Experiments in the Global South: Assessing Risks, Localizing Benefits, and Addressing Positionality

Herman

Panin²,

Wellman

et al. 2022

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrating Value for Money and Impact Evaluations: Issues, Institutions, and Opportunities

Cited by 11 publications

References 8 publications

Use of community engagement interventions to improve child immunisation in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Use of community engagement interventions to improve child immunisation in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

PROTOCOL: The effects of agricultural output market access interventions on agricultural, socio‐economic and food and nutrition security outcomes in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review

Field Experiments in the Global South: Assessing Risks, Localizing Benefits, and Addressing Positionality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About