Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) in Asia faces the challenge of assess and document the role of capacity development in enhancing CBNRM outcomes. To address this challenge, nine CBNRM-oriented organizations from four countries in East and Southeast Asia established an informal regional platform to strengthen their ability to carry out such evaluation. The paper describes the lessons learned from the project and examples of how collaborative learning provides a platform for those seeking to evaluate capacity development.
This book from Universalia Management Group presents major trends that have influenced international evaluation and provides an overview of the evolution of evaluation within specific sectors, such as the environment and agriculture.
Voluntary Organizations for Professional Evaluation (VOPEs): Learning from Africa, Americas, Asia, Australasia, Europe and Middle EastResourceOverview2013
This book is focused on case studies highlighting the experiences of regional and national VOPEs. They share their experiences in strengthening the capacities of individual evaluators to produce credible and useful evaluations, the institutional capacities of the VOPEs themselves, promoting equity-focused and gender-responsive evaluations, and, especially, the roles VOPEs are playing to improve the enabling environment for evaluation in their countries.
This report by Greet Peersman and Patricia Rogers for the Australasian Evaluation Society (AES) identifies four potential pathways towards professionalisation within the context of the AES: 1) Ad hoc, disconnected activities; 2) Focused, connected and strategic activities; 3) Voluntary credentialing of evaluators; and 4) Regulated and licensed profession. The main recommendation of the report is that the AES follow a pathway of focused, connected and strategic activities, with a view to considering a voluntary credentialing process down the track. A major feature of this report is the exploration of 41 activities and approaches that can be used to advance the professionalisation of monitoring and evaluation. These activities are likely to be of considerable interest to others who are undertaking or planning evaluation capacity strengthening activities.
This paper examines how monitoring and evaluation (M&E) does, or could, make a difference to Capacity Dvelopment (CD). It explores whether there is something different or unique about M&E of CD that isn’t addressed by predominant options and ways of thinking about M&E, and which might be better addressed by experimenting with learning-based approaches to M&E of CD.