Biases in impact evaluation

You’ve finished writing your evaluation report containing a neat LogFrame and objective and verifiable indicators. Rating: highly satisfactory. That’s good, but is it true for the development intervention as a whole?

In a guest post at the World Bank’s Development Impact blog, Martin Ravallion criticizes development evaluation that assesses projects in isolation of the entire development portfolio. He cites common pitfalls in conducting evaluation, such as the assumption of a negligible interaction effects among project components and a tendency for selection bias. But these biases are sometimes inherent to the programs and policies in consideration. Difficulty arises when taking a sample of roads, dams, and other big-ticket projects, or even multifaceted policy reforms.

If we are serious about assessing "develoment impact" then we will have to be more interventionist about what gets evaluated and more pragmatic and eclectic in how that is done.

Ravallion recommends the central coordination of what gets evaluated and thinking of creative ways to evaluate portfolios as a whole that considers interaction effects. You can read the essay here.

Does your evaluation workflow for climate mitigation and adaptation projects encounter and consider these biases? How do you deal with them, if at all?

Source: Development Impact via Smart Aid

Image credit: Smart Toolkit

Add comment

Plain text

  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Latest Blogs

What is Safe Monitoring and Evaluation Practice in the 21st Century?

Monitoring and evaluation practice can do harm. It can harm:

the environment by prioritizing economic gain over species that have no voice
people who are invisible to us when we are in a position of power
by asking for...

The GEF and Cleantech: Evaluating Efforts to Build an Innovation Ecosystem

Global factors such as technological advances, lowered costs, available capital, consumer demand and climate change have been encouraging the development and deployment of clean technologies as part of low...

Recent FAO evaluation highlights the role of GEF in programmes addressing integrated natural resource management for sustainable food and agriculture systems

In November 2018, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has released an evaluation of its contributions to integrated natural resource management for sustainable agriculture.

CIF Evaluation & Learning: What Are We Learning About the Big Issues in Climate Finance?

The scale and urgency of the climate crisis demands rapid action to prevent a range of consequences – from increased droughts and floods to huge economic losses and more extreme natural disasters.  

All major climate funds and...

Rethinking resilience, adaptation and transformation in a time of change

“How the world deals with large and serious problems is almost certainly going to shape our collective future” is the second line – and a promising start – in this edited Springer volume titled...