000			04413nam a22004457a 4500
001			G77117
003			MX-TxCIM
005			20211006073200.0
008			121211s ||||f| 0 p|p||0|| |
020			_a970-648-076-5
040			_aMX-TxCIM
072		0	_aA50
072		0	_aE14
082	0	4	_a338.91 _bWAT
100	1		_aMackay, R. _uInternational conference on impacts of agricultural research and development: Why has impact assessment research not made more of a difference?
110	0		_aCentro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo (CIMMYT), Mexico DF (Mexico)
111	2		_aInternational Conference on Impacts of Agricultural Research and Development _cSan José (Costa Rica) _d4-7 Feb 2002
245	0	0	_aExpanding the use of impact assessment and other evaluation research evidence
260			_aMexico, DF (Mexico) _bCIMMYT : _c2003
300			_ap. 62
340			_aPrinted
500			_aAbstract only
520			_aThe rationale behind impact assessments is the commonsense notion that the evidence from these will be used to bring about improvements in the policies and programs evaluated and thereby contribute to economic and social betterment. As it becomes evident that impact assessment research is making less than the desired difference to the alleviation of human distress, evaluation researchers seek to understand why, and what can be done about it. This paper addresses the difference/lack of difference made to social betterment (e.g. food sustainability, poverty reduction, and the sustainable environmental management) by impact assessment and by evaluation research more broadly. First, the paper examines the principal reasons why evidence from evaluation research is not more immediately and effectively used; then it explores some of the ways that practitioners in the international evaluation community are working to design and conduct evaluations that promote relevance, credibility, and the practical use of findings. The paper reviews the international evaluation community's current thinking about impact evaluation and other evaluation research. It also draws on the authors' direct experience conducting and promoting the use of evaluation in research and development organizations over the past 25 years. Evaluation is a powerful, emerging "transdiscipline". It is also a highly sensitive field of practice in that it is virtually never undertaken in a politically or ideologically neutral environment and seldom within a policy vacuum. However, it has been long acknowledged that its principal weakness is the relatively mild influence that evaluation evidence exerts on individuals, organizations, and the broader communities charged with decision making. Many explanations have been put forward for this, in addition to the fact that evaluation evidence is only one source of information used to influence policy and operations, others being the values, beliefs, preferences, prejudices, and needs of the decision makers and their constituencies. It is acknowledged that some evaluations are biased towards the perspective of a single stakeholder group, some fail to establish an evaluation team with credibility in content or methodology, some unjustifiably assume that the evaluation approach adopted is acceptable to the principle decision-makers. To address the lack of influence of evaluations, the different philosophies, perspectives, values and practices that make up the evaluation discipline have been subjected to close scrutiny. The purpose of this scrutiny is a better understanding of the construct "evaluation use" and the identification of practices that promote utilization. The paper reviews this work and makes practical suggestions as to what evaluators can do in order to "make more of a difference" to the policies and programs they address.
546			_aEnglish
591			_a0310|R01CIMPU|AGRIS 0301|AL-Economics Program
593			_aJuan Carlos Mendieta
595			_aCPC
650	1	7	_aEconomic development _gAGROVOC _2 _91089
650	1	0	_aEconomic policies
650	1	0	_aEnvironmental policies
650	1	0	_aFood crops _91994
650	1	0	_aFood policies _91115
650	1	7	_aPoverty _gAGROVOC _2 _91215
650	1	0	_aProduction economics
650	1	0	_aSocial policies
653	0		_aCIMMYT
700	1		_aHorton, D., _ecoaut.
700	1		_9960 _aWatson, D.J. _gResearch & Partnership Program _8INT3479 _eed.
942			_cPRO
999			_c6866 _d6866