The growth of impact evaluation for international development: how much have we learned?

Cameron, Drew; Mishra, Anjini; Brown, Annette N.

doi:10.1080/19439342.2015.1034156

Cited by 95 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is better than the mean lag for socialscience impact evaluations generally (see Cameron et al 2016), but our sample includes draft papers, while the population in the Cameron et al study does not. The right-hand side of the evidence gap map captures what we call other considerations, which are certain features of impact evaluations that help us to understand the evidence base.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The current state of peacebuilding programming and evidence

Brown¹,

McCollister²,

Cameron³

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

About 3ieThe International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is an international grant-making NGO promoting evidence-informed development policies and programmes. We are the global leader in funding and producing high-quality evidence of what works, how, why and at what cost. We believe that better and policy-relevant evidence will make development more effective and improve people's lives. 3ie scoping papers 3ie thematic window grant programmes typically start with a consultative process that includes a scoping study identifying the current state of impact-evaluation evidence in a particular sector. Scoping studies identify the promising questions for research synthesis and the priority questions for further impact-evaluation research. They analyse the existing supply of impact-evaluation and systematic-review evidence as well as the demand for such evidence from policymakers and programme managers. About this scoping paperThis paper provides an assessment of the supply of and demand for evidence on peacebuilding interventions in support of a joint 3ie -Innovations for Poverty Action -World Bank initiative called Evidence for Peacebuilding. The scoping paper is the key output of the stocktaking phase of the initiative, and the final publication reflects consultation that occurred after the draft paper was prepared and presented. All of the content is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not represent the opinions of 3ie, its donors or its Board of Commissioners. Any errors and omissions are also the sole responsibility of the authors. Any comments or queries should be directed to the corresponding author Annette N. Brown at abrown@3ieimpact.org. AcknowledgementsThis paper is part of a joint initiative of 3ie, Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA) and the World Bank. The work for this paper was funded by a contract from the World Bank.The scoping paper is based on three primary inputs: the evidence gap map, the portfolio review and the stakeholder survey. 3ie staff and consultants prepared the evidence gap map under the direction of Drew Cameron and Annette Brown. A separate report on the evidence gap map entitled Evidence for peacebuilding: an evidence gap map serves as a companion piece to this paper and is available as part of 3ie's Evidence Gap Map Report series. We would like to recognise Anjini Mishra, Mario Picon, Hisham Esper, Flor Calvo and Katia Peterson, who coauthored the gap map report.IPA staff prepared the portfolio review under the direction of Faith McCollister. 3ie staff, with IPA assistance, conducted and analysed the stakeholder survey, under the direction of Jennifer Ludwig. Annette Brown provided leadership and management over all inputs and the scoping paper itself.We are grateful to Jane Burke for research assistance.We would like to thank the Alliance for Peacebuilding, United States Institutes for Peace, the World Bank, the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund, and International Rescue Committee for sponsoring and hosting workshops that provided valuable inputs and feedback...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The current state of peacebuilding programming and evidence

Brown¹,

McCollister²,

Cameron³

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much progress has been made towards the conceptualisation of the rationale for development effectiveness resulting in an increased supply of evidence such as impact evaluations and systematic reviews (Cameron, Mishra, and Brown 2015). The current state of the art in evidence-informed development then seems to meet Step 1 and Step 2 in the theory of change presented in Figure 1.…”

Section: Towards a Programme Theory Of Evidence-informed Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Walking the last mile on the long road to evidence-informed development: building capacity to use research evidence

Langer

Stewart

Erasmus

et al. 2015

Journal of Development Effectiveness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Researchers at 3ie have compiled the most complete database of published impact evaluations available and found that as recently as 1995, fewer than 10 studies of developing country policies were published each year (see Figure 1). That number has grown rapidly, with more than 300 studies coming out annually (Cameron, Mishra, and Brown 2015). The Abdul Jameel Latif Poverty Action Lab (JPAL) and Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA) are relatively new research centres dedicated to conducting impact evaluations, and in 2014 they listed 567 and 220 ongoing studies, respectively.…”

Section: Politics Rules But Evaluation Still Holds Much Promisementioning

confidence: 99%

Aid at the frontier: building knowledge collectively

Levine

Savedoff

2015

Journal of Development Effectiveness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper articulates how programme evaluation generally, and impact evaluation specifically, contributes to good governance -not by replacing politics, but by informing it. We argue that institutions with the mandate to accelerate progress in the developing world through aid transfers are particularly well suited to fund impact evaluations. We argue, in fact, that funding impact evaluations through a collective vehicle like the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) should be a primary focus of foreign aid. Finally, we highlight the conditions needed and the additional efforts required to yield the full benefits of collective investment in finding out what works.

show abstract

The growth of impact evaluation for international development: how much have we learned?

Cited by 95 publications

References 2 publications

The current state of peacebuilding programming and evidence

The current state of peacebuilding programming and evidence

Walking the last mile on the long road to evidence-informed development: building capacity to use research evidence

Aid at the frontier: building knowledge collectively

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About