Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

EEPA Call for Papers

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Journal of Evaluation
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Clements, P.
Right arrow Articles by Sasaki, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Reducing World Poverty by Improving Evaluation of Development Aid

Paul Clements

Western Michigan University, clements{at}wmich.edu

Thomaz Chianca

Western Michigan University

Ryoh Sasaki

Western Michigan University

This article argues that given its structural conditions, development aid bears a particularly heavy burden of learning and accountability. Unfortunately, however, the organization of evaluation guarantees that evaluations will be inconsistent and it creates incentives for positive bias. This article presents evidence from organizational studies of aid agencies, from the public choice literature, from eight development projects in Africa, and from one in India, that demonstrates positive bias and inconsistency in monitoring and evaluation. It proposes that the evaluation function should be professionalized through an approach titled "monitoring and evaluation for cost effectiveness," and it compares this approach to the World Bank's results-based monitoring and evaluation, the Development Assistance Committee's five evaluation criteria, and evaluations based on randomized trials. This article explains the analytics of the proposed approach and suggests directions for further research.

Key Words: development assistance • cost effectiveness • evaluation bias • professionalism

American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 29, No. 2, 195-214 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1098214008318657


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
American Journal of EvaluationHome page
A. P. Williams and J. C. Morris
The Development of Theory-Driven Evaluation in the Military: Theory on the Front Line
American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2009; 30(1): 62 - 79.
[Abstract] [PDF]