External Validity and Policy Adaptation: From Impact Evaluation to Policy Design

IF 8.7 1区 经济学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES World Bank Research Observer Pub Date : 2019-08-01 DOI:10.1093/wbro/lky010
M. J. Williams
{"title":"External Validity and Policy Adaptation: From Impact Evaluation to Policy Design","authors":"M. J. Williams","doi":"10.1093/wbro/lky010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n With the growing number of impact evaluations worldwide, the question of how to apply this evidence in policy making processes has arguably become the main challenge for evidence-based policy making. How can policy makers predict whether a policy will have the same impact in their context as it did elsewhere, and how should this influence the policy’s design and implementation? This paper suggests that failures of external validity (both in transporting and scaling up policy) can be understood as arising from an interaction between a policy’s theory of change and a dimension of the context in which it is being implemented. The paper surveys existing approaches to analyzing external validity, and suggests that there has been more focus on the generalizability of impact evaluation results than on the applicability of evidence to specific contexts. To help fill this gap, the study develops a method of “mechanism mapping” that maps a policy’s theory of change against salient contextual assumptions to identify external validity problems and suggest appropriate policy adaptations. In deciding whether and how to adapt a policy, there is a fundamental informational trade-off between the strength of evidence on the policy from other contexts and the policy maker’s information about the local context.","PeriodicalId":47647,"journal":{"name":"World Bank Research Observer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/wbro/lky010","citationCount":"26","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Bank Research Observer","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lky010","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

Abstract

With the growing number of impact evaluations worldwide, the question of how to apply this evidence in policy making processes has arguably become the main challenge for evidence-based policy making. How can policy makers predict whether a policy will have the same impact in their context as it did elsewhere, and how should this influence the policy’s design and implementation? This paper suggests that failures of external validity (both in transporting and scaling up policy) can be understood as arising from an interaction between a policy’s theory of change and a dimension of the context in which it is being implemented. The paper surveys existing approaches to analyzing external validity, and suggests that there has been more focus on the generalizability of impact evaluation results than on the applicability of evidence to specific contexts. To help fill this gap, the study develops a method of “mechanism mapping” that maps a policy’s theory of change against salient contextual assumptions to identify external validity problems and suggest appropriate policy adaptations. In deciding whether and how to adapt a policy, there is a fundamental informational trade-off between the strength of evidence on the policy from other contexts and the policy maker’s information about the local context.
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
外部有效性与政策适应:从影响评价到政策设计
随着世界各地影响评估的数量不断增加,如何在政策制定过程中应用这些证据的问题可以说已经成为循证政策制定的主要挑战。政策制定者如何预测一项政策在其背景下是否会产生与其他地方相同的影响,这应该如何影响政策的设计和实施?本文认为,外部有效性的失败(包括在运输和扩大政策方面)可以被理解为是由政策的变化理论和实施政策的背景维度之间的相互作用引起的。本文调查了现有的外部有效性分析方法,并表明人们更关注影响评估结果的可推广性,而不是证据对特定背景的适用性。为了填补这一空白,该研究开发了一种“机制映射”方法,将政策的变化理论与显著的背景假设进行映射,以识别外部有效性问题并提出适当的政策调整建议。在决定是否以及如何调整政策时,来自其他背景的政策证据的强度与决策者关于当地背景的信息之间存在根本的信息权衡。
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
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
1.20%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: The World Bank Journals, including the Research Observer, boast the largest circulation among economics titles. The Research Observer is distributed freely to over 9,100 subscribers in non-OECD countries. Geared towards informing nonspecialist readers about research within and outside the Bank, it covers areas of economics relevant for development policy. Intended for policymakers, project officers, journalists, and educators, its surveys and overviews require only minimal background in economic analysis. Articles are not sent to referees but are assessed and approved by the Editorial Board, including distinguished economists from outside the Bank. The Observer has around 1,500 subscribers in OECD countries and nearly 10,000 subscribers in developing countries.
期刊最新文献
Revisiting the Measurement of Digital Inclusion Measuring Total Carbon Pricing Social Norms and Gender Disparities with a Focus on Female Labor Force Participation in South Asia Is There Job Polarization in Developing Economies? A Review and Outlook Measuring Total Carbon Pricing
×
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