ParEvo: A methodology for the exploration and evaluation of alternative futures

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Evaluation Pub Date : 2023-09-10 DOI:10.1177/13563890231188743
Rick Davies, Tom Hobson, Lara Mani, Simon Beard
{"title":"ParEvo: A methodology for the exploration and evaluation of alternative futures","authors":"Rick Davies, Tom Hobson, Lara Mani, Simon Beard","doi":"10.1177/13563890231188743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evaluators’ main encounter with views of the future is in the form of theories of change, about how a programme will work to achieve a desired end, in a given context. These are typically focussed on specific relatively short-term futures, which are both desired and expected. But even in the short term, reality often involves unpredictable events which must be responded to. Other ways of thinking about the future may be helpful and complementary, notably those developed by foresight practitioners working in the field of futures studies. These pay more attention to a range of possible futures, rather than a single perspective. One way of exploring such futures is by using ParEvo.org, an online process that enables the participatory exploration of alternative futures. This article explains how the ParEvo process works, the theory informing its design, and its usage to date. Attention is given to three evaluation challenges, and methods to address them: (a) optimising exercise design, (b) analysis of immediate results and (c) identifying longer-term impacts. Two exercises undertaken by the Cambridge-based Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) in 2021–2022 are used as illustrative examples.","PeriodicalId":47511,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890231188743","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evaluators’ main encounter with views of the future is in the form of theories of change, about how a programme will work to achieve a desired end, in a given context. These are typically focussed on specific relatively short-term futures, which are both desired and expected. But even in the short term, reality often involves unpredictable events which must be responded to. Other ways of thinking about the future may be helpful and complementary, notably those developed by foresight practitioners working in the field of futures studies. These pay more attention to a range of possible futures, rather than a single perspective. One way of exploring such futures is by using ParEvo.org, an online process that enables the participatory exploration of alternative futures. This article explains how the ParEvo process works, the theory informing its design, and its usage to date. Attention is given to three evaluation challenges, and methods to address them: (a) optimising exercise design, (b) analysis of immediate results and (c) identifying longer-term impacts. Two exercises undertaken by the Cambridge-based Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) in 2021–2022 are used as illustrative examples.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
ParEvo:一种探索和评估替代性期货的方法
评价人员对未来的看法主要是以变革理论的形式出现的,即在给定的背景下,一个方案将如何实现预期的目标。这些交易通常侧重于特定的相对短期的期货,既有期望的,也有预期的。但即使在短期内,现实也常常涉及不可预测的事件,必须对此作出反应。其他思考未来的方法可能是有益的和互补的,特别是那些在未来研究领域工作的远见实践者所开发的方法。它们更多地关注一系列可能的未来,而不是单一的观点。探索这种未来的一种方式是使用ParEvo.org,这是一个在线程序,可以让人们参与探索可选择的未来。本文解释了ParEvo过程是如何工作的,为其设计提供依据的理论,以及迄今为止的使用情况。关注三个评估挑战和解决它们的方法:(a)优化练习设计,(b)分析即时结果,(c)确定长期影响。本文以剑桥存在风险研究中心(CSER)在2021-2022年进行的两项研究为例进行了说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Evaluation
Evaluation SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Using co-creation to address monitoring and evaluation challenges: The experience of South Africa’s evaluation hackathon What role should we play to be effective evaluators? – practitioner reflections Principles and methods to advance value for money Evaluating site selection at design in food systems interventions: A formative geospatial approach What works in democracy support? How to fill evidence and usability gaps through evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1