Critical reflections on the use of participatory methodologies to build evaluation capacities in international development organisations

There has been a greater focus on strengthening evaluation capacity building (ECB) within development organisations in recent years. This can be attributed in part to the growing appreciation of the value of participatory and collaborative forms of evaluation. Evaluation is increasingly seen as an ongoing learning process and an important means of strengthening capacity and improving organisational performance (Horton et al., 2003:7). While there are many benefits of using participatory methodologies in ECB projects, our experiences and a review of the literature in this area highlight the many challenges, issues and contradictions that can affect the success of such ECB efforts. We discuss these issues, drawing on our learnings from the ongoing participatory action research (PAR) project 'Assessing Communication for Social Change’ (AC4SC). This four year project, which began in 2007, is a collaboration between communication and development academics and evaluation specialists from two Australian universities and communication for development practitioners and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) staff in the NGO Equal Access Nepal (EAN). The aim is to develop, implement, and evaluate a participatory methodology for assessing the social change impacts of community radio programs produced by EAN. It builds on previous projects that used ethnographic action research (EAR) methodology (Tacchi et al., 2007).

Critical reflections on the use of participatory methodologies to build evaluation capacities in international development organisations

"In this chapter the authors present a critique of Participatory Evaluation as worked in development projects, in this case, in Nepal. The article works between established claims that Participatory Evaluation builds capacity at programmatic and organisational levels, and the specific experiences of these claims in the authors’ current work. They highlight the need to address key difficulties such as high turn-over of staff and resulting loss of capacity to engage in Participatory Evaluation, and the difficulty of communication between academic as compared with local practical wisdoms. A key issue is the challenge of addressing the inevitable issues of power inequities that such approaches encounter. While Participatory Evaluation has been around for some time, it has only enjoyed more widespread recognition of its value in comparatively recent times, with its uptake in international development environments. To this extent, the practice is still in its early stages of development, and Jo, June and Michael’s work contributes to strengthening and more comprehensively understanding it. With regard to the meta-theme of this publication, this chapter is an example of how context not only influences the methodology to be used and the praxis of how it is to be used, but contributes to early explication of the core nature of an emerging methodology."

Considering the economic value of natural design elements at city scale

With increasing signs of climate change and the influence of national and international carbon-related laws and agreements, governments all over the world are grappling with how to rapidly transition to low-carbon living. This includes adapting to the impacts of climate change that are very likely to be experienced due to current emission levels (including extreme weather and sea level changes), and mitigating against further growth in greenhouse gas emissions that are likely to result in further impacts. Internationally, the concept of ‘Biophilic Urbanism’, a term coined by Professors Tim Beatley and Peter Newman to refer to the use of natural elements as design features in urban landscapes, is emerging as a key component in addressing such climate change challenges in rapidly growing urban contexts. However, the economics of incorporating such options is not well understood and requires further attention to underpin a mainstreaming of biophilic urbanism. Indeed, there appears to be an ad hoc, reactionary approach to creating economic arguments for or against the design, installation or maintenance of natural elements such as green walls, green roofs, streetscapes, and parklands. With this issue in mind, this paper will overview research as part of an industry collaborative research project that considers the potential for using a number of environmental economic valuation techniques that have evolved over the last several decades in agricultural and resource economics, to systematically value the economic value of biophilic elements in the urban context. Considering existing literature on environmental economic valuation techniques, the paper highlights opportunities for creating a standardised language for valuing biophilic elements. The conclusions have implications for expanding the field of environmental economic value to support the economic evaluations and planning of the greater use of natural elements in cities. Insights are also noted for the more mature fields of agricultural and resource economics.