From the Interim Co-Editors: Thinking Inclusively and Strategically to Address the Complexity of Our World

Abstract

We are excited to present the third issue of volume 43 of the American Journal of Evaluation ( AJE ). This is the fi rst issue that we have stewarded as Interim Co-Editors-in-Chief. This issue contains six articles and a Method Note. This issue also includes a section on economic evaluation with a note from the Section Editor, Brooks Bowden. While each article is distinct with its own content and methodological focus, as a collective, these articles give practical guidance on how evaluation practice can be more inclusive and strategically modi fi ed to address the complexity and social issues in our world. It is our aim to re fl ect as much of the diversity of the evaluation fi eld as possible in each issue; and we believe this issue offers something for most evaluation scholars and practitioners. The fi rst article in this issue is authored by Melvin M. Mark, former Editor of AJE. In his article, Mark argues for the necessity of planning for change as program modi fi cations will inevitably occur. Recognizing not all program changes can be predetermined, he suggests that evaluators can work with stakeholders to make informed decisions about possible adaptions. Building on these, and related arguments, he reviews various forms of program modi fi cations and then offers a range of options for how evaluators can plan for such modi fi cations; or, a priori planning for potential adap-tions . Mark outlines the general steps for a priori planning, providing concrete examples of how evaluators can incorporate these steps into their practice. The practical questions included in this piece will prove helpful for evaluators, along with stakeholders, to generate ideas for possible program adaptations.Inthesecond article, Jennifer J. Esala, Liz Sweitzer, Craig Higson-Smith, and Kirsten L. Anderson discuss human rights issues in the context of advocacy evaluation in the Global South. These authors highlight a number of urgent issues not adequately covered in the literature on advocacy evaluation in the Global South. Evaluators and others interested in advocacy evaluation in Global South contexts will fi nd this piece particularly informative because it provides a literature review focused on how work