Country-led monitoring and evaluation systems through the lens of participatory governance and co-production: Implications for a Made in Africa Evaluation approach

Q2 Social Sciences African Evaluation Journal Pub Date : 2022-08-23 DOI:10.4102/aej.v10i1.622
C. Morkel, Adeline Sibanda
{"title":"Country-led monitoring and evaluation systems through the lens of participatory governance and co-production: Implications for a Made in Africa Evaluation approach","authors":"C. Morkel, Adeline Sibanda","doi":"10.4102/aej.v10i1.622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"management and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) became commonplace, the features of which continue to imbue national M&E systems across the continent. These systems, if not intentionally so designed and implemented, are not particularly focused on learning for course-correction and performance improvement from the perspective of citizens. Conducting evaluations, in particular, is often based on the need for accountability to funders or decision-makers, as opposed to downward accountability to the public and intended beneficiaries of the interventions. Objectives: This article explores how localised approaches to governance (merged with co-production) could ensure that evaluation systems are liberatory if they are endogenous and indigenous in their design and respond to the needs of citizens (rather than serving an upward accountability agenda). Method: Through the analytical framework of participatory governance and co-production, this article examines how participatory approaches to establishing national evaluation (and monitoring) systems may help the African continent liberate itself from the instrumental adoption of M&E systems, defined by compliance and accountability, and instead design systems based on a citizen-owned, people-centred notion of downward accountability. Results: Participatory governance and co-production are well aligned to the principles of MAE (Made in Africa Evaluation) and may provide the means to arriving at more inclusive forms of M&E systems development and, concomitantly, more inclusive ways of producing and using evidence for policy, governance and development on a national scale. Conclusion: Although desirable due its potential to transform systems of governance to become more citizen-centred, co-production must not be romanticised nor over-simplified. Increasing levels of citizen participation in governance must consider that there are significant changes that need to be made to institutional structures and processes, such as new forms of accountability, governance, systems and structures for citizen involvement. Therefore, a combination of practical, technical, ideological, relational and political factors must be considered in the adoption of more participatory approaches in establishing national M&E systems.","PeriodicalId":37531,"journal":{"name":"African Evaluation Journal","volume":"216 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Evaluation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v10i1.622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

management and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) became commonplace, the features of which continue to imbue national M&E systems across the continent. These systems, if not intentionally so designed and implemented, are not particularly focused on learning for course-correction and performance improvement from the perspective of citizens. Conducting evaluations, in particular, is often based on the need for accountability to funders or decision-makers, as opposed to downward accountability to the public and intended beneficiaries of the interventions. Objectives: This article explores how localised approaches to governance (merged with co-production) could ensure that evaluation systems are liberatory if they are endogenous and indigenous in their design and respond to the needs of citizens (rather than serving an upward accountability agenda). Method: Through the analytical framework of participatory governance and co-production, this article examines how participatory approaches to establishing national evaluation (and monitoring) systems may help the African continent liberate itself from the instrumental adoption of M&E systems, defined by compliance and accountability, and instead design systems based on a citizen-owned, people-centred notion of downward accountability. Results: Participatory governance and co-production are well aligned to the principles of MAE (Made in Africa Evaluation) and may provide the means to arriving at more inclusive forms of M&E systems development and, concomitantly, more inclusive ways of producing and using evidence for policy, governance and development on a national scale. Conclusion: Although desirable due its potential to transform systems of governance to become more citizen-centred, co-production must not be romanticised nor over-simplified. Increasing levels of citizen participation in governance must consider that there are significant changes that need to be made to institutional structures and processes, such as new forms of accountability, governance, systems and structures for citizen involvement. Therefore, a combination of practical, technical, ideological, relational and political factors must be considered in the adoption of more participatory approaches in establishing national M&E systems.
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
参与式治理和合作生产视角下国家主导的监测和评价系统:对非洲制造评价方法的影响
管理和监测与评价(M&E)变得司空见惯,其特点继续影响着整个非洲大陆的国家M&E系统。这些制度,如果不是有意这样设计和实施的,就不会特别注重从公民的角度纠正课程和改善成绩的学习。特别是进行评价,往往是基于对出资者或决策者的问责,而不是对公众和干预措施的预期受益者的向下问责。目标:本文探讨了本地化的治理方法(与合作生产合并)如何确保评估系统是自由的,如果它们在设计上是内生的和本土的,并响应公民的需求(而不是服务于向上的问责议程)。方法:通过参与式治理和合作生产的分析框架,本文研究了建立国家评估(和监测)系统的参与式方法如何帮助非洲大陆从由合规性和问责制定义的M&E系统的工具性采用中解放出来,而是基于公民所有、以人为本的向下问责制概念设计系统。结果:参与式治理和合作生产与非洲制造评估的原则非常一致,并可能为实现更具包容性的M&E系统发展形式提供手段,同时,在国家范围内为政策、治理和发展提供更包容的证据生产和使用方式。结论:尽管由于其有可能使治理系统转变为更加以公民为中心,合作生产是可取的,但不应被浪漫化或过度简化。提高公民参与治理的水平必须考虑到需要对体制结构和进程作出重大改变,例如新的问责制、治理、公民参与的制度和结构。因此,必须综合考虑实际、技术、意识形态、关系和政治因素,在建立国家监测和评估系统方面采取更具有参与性的办法。
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
African Evaluation Journal
African Evaluation Journal Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles merit on any subject related to evaluation, and provide targeted information of professional interest to members of AfrEA and its national associations. Aims of the African Evaluation Journal (AEJ): -AEJ aims to be a high-quality, peer-reviewed journal that builds evaluation-related knowledge and practice in support of effective developmental policies on the African continent. -AEJ aims to provide a communication platform for scholars and practitioners of evaluation to share and debate ideas about evaluation theory and practice in Africa. -AEJ aims to promote cross-fertilisation of ideas and methodologies between countries and between evaluation scholars and practitioners in the developed and developing world. -AEJ aims to promote evaluation scholarship and authorship, and a culture of peer-review in the African evaluation community.
期刊最新文献
Erratum: Review of Goldman and Pabari’s book through the lens of the work of Sulley Gariba Table of Contents Vol 11, No 1 (2023) Improving citizen-based monitoring in South Africa: A social media model A results-based monitoring and evaluation system for the Namibian Child Support Grant programme Lessons learned from an occupational therapy programme needs assessment
×
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