|
Dear Colleague,
Three factors that can promote the use of evidence in policy are external accountability mechanisms, transparency, and shared expertise. This issue notes efforts on all three fronts. First, the UK is creating external accountability through its Independent Commission for Aid Impact (which I also highlighted in a recent blog). Second, the MCC and World Bank are improving transparency by publicly sharing data. Third, expertise is becoming more widespread through efforts by groups like J-PAL, which collaborates with developing country researchers; and 3ie, whose grant program favors proposals with in-country researchers. Good steps forward on all three fronts.
Regards,
William D. Savedoff
Senior Fellow
External accountability for development in the UK |
Last month, the Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) in the UK launched a consultation to get public input on what its priorities should be for evaluating the country's development assistance programs. The UK has been a leader in efforts to support research and evidence for policy decisions and a strong supporter of impact evaluation work. But by establishing ICAI, the UK has gone further than most countries in establishing independent external oversight for aid programs, thereby raising the visibility of evaluation work and the standards of evidence. While the foundation for ICAI was set during the previous Labor government, the current British government has fully embraced the concept showing a remarkable political consensus in favor of transparent and rational policymaking. Photo: London by Melork, on Flickr |
|
 |
Publicly accessible data should be the standard |
In a range of fields, from medicine to economics, making data publicly accessible has become an accepted part of assuring integrity in research, strengthening the credibility of findings, and providing opportunities to answer new questions with already collected information. This is beginning to happen with impact evaluations in developing countries.
One of the founding principles of The Millennium Challenge Corporation is transparency, and it has made good on that commitment by posting baseline data from three of their impact evaluations on its site. Likewise, The World Bank's Microdata Catalogue provides access to ten datasets and includes a mechanism for uploading your own data to the site, so that it could become a key repository for such information. 3ie's grant agreements require that researchers make data available publicly after completing their study, so we should see the first of these datasets become available in the coming year. |
|
 |
Growing collaboration and sharing the expertise |
In consultations for the Evaluation Gap Working Group, people regularly stressed that generating and using evidence for policy is something developing countries can and should be doing for themselves rather than being imposed or provided only by external agencies and foreign research centers. One of the most positive trends over the past 10 years in impact evaluation has been the growing expertise in developing countries and the rise in local collaboration with external researchers.
The Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) is a prominent example. It has partnered closely with researchers, NGOs and program managers in developing countries. It recently opened an office at the University of Cape Town to expand on this collaborative approach with a one-day conference.
3ie is also furthering this trend by giving preference to grant proposals that include clear links with policymakers and which are either led by or include significant involvement of local research institutions. Of the 68 grants for impact evaluations listed on 3ie's website, over 40 percent of the principal investigators are from developing country research institutes. |
|
 |
Additional Resources
- The conference "Mind the Gap: From Evidence to Policy Impact" will be held in Cuernavaca, June 15-17. The deadline to apply for scholarships (bursaries) is March 18, while the deadline for registration is April 15. The conference organizers are 3ie, INSP , IADB, and CEDLAS.
- In an interview with FAI, Michael Clemens provides a cogent explanation of impact evaluation and why counterfactuals are important. You can also view Michael's full presentation of "When Does Rigorous Impact Evaluation Make a Difference? The Case of the Millennium Villages".
- You can subscribe to a new monthly e-newsletter started by the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy that summarizes key findings from rigorous evaluations of social policy programs--primarily based in the U.S. and with an emphasis on RCTs
- Making Schools Work: New Evidence on Accountability Reforms by Barbara Bruns, Deon Filmer and Harry Patrinos assesses which education strategies are showing success. It goes beyond previous works by relying systematically on the growing body of rigorous impact evaluations in this field.
- A call for proposals to study whether institutional strengthening programs have an impact has been issued by the Inter-American Development Bank, with a deadline of May 13, 2011.
- "Better Aid: Evaluation in Development Agencies" presents findings from peer reviews conducted by the OECD Development Assistance Committee. The study includes information about the specific institutional settings, resources, policies and practices of each of the DAC Evaluation Network's 32 members.
|
