- Home
- About us
- ILAC Activities
- Resources
- ILAC Publications
- ILAC Briefs
- ILAC Sourcebook
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Chapter 6: Introduction Part 2
- Chapter 7: Innovation histories
- Chapter 9: Culture study as a tool for change
- Chapter 12: Collaborative agreements
- Chapter 13: Facilitation as a foundation skill for ILAC
- Chapter 14: Learning alliances
- Chapter 15: Institutional histories
- Chapter 16: Engaging Scientists through Institutional Histories
- Chapter 18: Horizontal evaluation
- Chapter 19: Appreciative inquiry
- Part 3 - Cases and experiences
- Part 4 - Challenges and strategies
- About the authors
- Glossary
- References
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Presentations by ILAC Team
- Working Papers
- Journal Articles
- Newsletter
- Reports
- ILAC Library
- Tools and methods for M&E
- Appreciative inquiry
- Biophysical measurements
- Case study
- Content analysis
- Contribution analysis
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Creative expression
- Diaries, journals and logs
- Dreams realised or visioning
- Expert review
- GIS mapping
- Graphing results
- Group assessment
- Historical trends and timelines
- Horizontal evaluation
- Impact evaluation
- Benefit-cost methods
- Case studies
- Cost-effectiveness analysis
- Counterfactual Impact Evaluation (CIE)
- Difference-in-difference
- Econometric methods
- Ex-post comparison of project beneficiaries with a control group
- Instrumental variables
- Integrated partial indicators
- Mathematical programming
- Modified peer review
- Partial indicators of impact
- Patent analysis
- Pipeline comparison
- Production function approach
- Propensity score matching
- Quasi-experimental design, involving the use of matched control and project groups
- Randomization
- Rapid assessment or review, conducted ex post
- Regression discontinuity design
- Simulation method
- User surveys
- Impact flow diagram
- Innovation histories
- Institutional history
- Institutional linkage diagram
- Interviews
- Learning alliances
- Learning-oriented evaluation
- M&E Frameworks
- M&E wheel (or "spider web")
- Mapping (sketch)
- Matrix scoring
- Most significant change
- Net-Map
- Non-random sampling
- Observation
- Outcome mapping
- Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis
- Participatory methods
- Performance indicators
- Photographs and video
- Problem and objectives trees
- Random sampling
- Ranking and pocket charts
- Rapid appraisal methods
- Relative scales or ladders
- Rich pictures (or mind maps)
- SWOT
- Seasonal calendars
- Semantic differentials
- Social mapping or well-being ranking
- Sociograms
- Stakeholder analysis
- Survey
- Systems (or inputs-outputs) diagram
- Theory-Based Evaluation
- Transects
- Evaluation studies and reports
- Evaluating capacity development
- Partnership
- Seminars
- Video Room
- Links to other sites
- E-learning courses
- ILAC Publications
- Contact
- Blog
1999 Annual Review of Development Effectiveness
Sun, 08/31/2008 - 12:52 — Cristina Sette
Publication Type:
MiscellaneousSource:
The World Bank, Washington DC (1999)Keywords:
Evaluation; M&E; MonitoringAbstract:
Changes in the global environment over the past decade have profoundly altered the context of Bank operations. Many developing countries have undertaken major political and economic reforms, opening their economies and political processes. At the same time, globalization has brought new opportunities for gain?and new risks of instability and rising inequality within and among states. Aid flows have stagnated, even as new demands for official resources have escalated. Despite worldwide improvements in social indicators, development progress has been disappointing, poverty trends have worsened, and most low-income countries remain heavily dependent on aid. Per capita incomes actually fell during 1985?95?by 1.4 percent a year in low-income countries (ex-cluding China and India) and by 0.7 percent a year in middle-income countries. Inevitably, governments of developed and developing countries, as well as the public at large, have become more concerned about development effectiveness. This has led to a wideranging search for improved approaches to development cooperation. The Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF) encapsulates major themes around which a consensus of the development community is crystallizing. The Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers?to be prepared jointly by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and borrowing countries?are a closely related response. Since its unveiling a year ago, the CDF has evoked considerable interest. The basic elements of the CDF are not new. What is new is their joint articulation as a guide to development assistance. First, development constraints are structural and social and cannot be overcome through economic stabilization and policy adjustment alone?they require a holistic, broad-based approach. Second, policy reform and institutional development cannot be imported or imposed: without domestic ownership, reforms and investments are not sustainable. Third, successful development requires partnerships among government, local communities, the private sector, civil society, and development agencies. Fourth, development activities must be guided and judged by results. CDF pilot activity is beginning in 13 countries, and its dimensions are still evolving. Although it is too early to assess the CDF as such, this year's Annual Review of Development Effectiveness examines development experience through the lens of CDF principles, with a view to drawing lessons for CDF implementation.
Sublibrary:
Evaluation
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page