- 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
Knowledge Sharing in Development Agencies: Lessons from Four Cases
Sun, 08/31/2008 - 12:52 — Cristina Sette
Publication Type:
MiscellaneousSource:
World Bank, Washington DC (2003)URL:
http://lnweb90.worldbank.org/oed/oeddoclib.nsf/DocUNIDViewForJavaSearch/2889773BCCFD932D85256DC00055B9DE/$file/development_agencies.pdfKeywords:
Knowledge SharingAbstract:
The centrality of knowledge for development cooperation agencies led in the two years after the WDR to the rapid spread of notions of knowledge management and knowledge sharing across the agency community. The British Department for International Development (DFID) has embarked upon a knowledge sharing project. The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) is developing a new knowledge management network; as is the German Agency for Technical Cooperation. The Inter-American Development Bank, the European Commission, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and the Canadian International Development Agency are also amongst those that have embarked on knowledge projects. This trend is not confined to official development assistance. A number of existing NGOs have also become active in the new knowledge-based aid, such as Oxfam and TearFund in Britain. Moreover, a new set of what may be termed” Knowledge NGOs” has also appeared on the development stage, including OneWorld and the International Institute for Communications and Development.
This paper is a contribution to the first large-scale internal evaluation of such activities, currently underway in the World Bank. It will provide a brief comparative perspective for the Bank on knowledge sharing activities in four other agencies. Three of these are agencies which we have been researching for nearly three years: DFID, JICA and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida). Our analysis of these agencies is based on 120 interviews with staff from these agencies; analysis of large numbers of agency documents and web pages; and feedback from agency staff regarding our provisional analyses. More detailed analysis of these agencies’ knowledge activities is available from our project homepage: www.ed.ac.uk/futgov-home.html. At the request of OED, we are also providing some comparative analysis of a fourth agency, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Here our analysis is based on a brief visit to EBRD in May 2002.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page