Yes, I try to integrate these themes into all evaluations. Clients are often very open to learning about ‘for whom’ their programs work. This information helps them know whether their program supports different groups of people.
In terms of environment, there tends to be a bit of hesitancy at first, as the link between program activities and environmental implications can be fuzzy. It could be that there are no implications. But asking about the environment provides a starting point for discussion.
As Silva noted, there have been many efforts to promote the measurement of social impacts. The UN system typically does this by using a human rights/gender equality lens (see UNEG Ethical Guidelines 2008 and UN-SWAP 2006). Many UN agencies also outline this need in their evaluation policies.
Similarly, there are many guidelines for mainstreaming environmental and climate change considerations into programs and policies (UNDP did a stocktake in 2010). UN agencies typically speak to this theme in evaluation guidance documents.
While it would help if TORs asked and budgeted for questions around social and environmental impacts of programming, I agree with Silva that we should advocate for them if these elements are not there.
A challenge I initially faced was, “well, how do we do this?” I’m currently finishing up my dissertation focused on answering this question. Examining previous evaluations of food security programs, I’m finding lots of evidence showing us how, why, and in what context we should integrate these themes.
We should engage with methodological developments from the literature and try them out. Ask questions such as: how do different groups experience this program? And how has climate change affected people's experiences? Share your process and learnings.
Evaluations could play in promoting equity and environmental sustainability, and we must.
RE: Are you considering social and environmental criteria in your evaluations?
Hi Serge and all,
Yes, I try to integrate these themes into all evaluations. Clients are often very open to learning about ‘for whom’ their programs work. This information helps them know whether their program supports different groups of people.
In terms of environment, there tends to be a bit of hesitancy at first, as the link between program activities and environmental implications can be fuzzy. It could be that there are no implications. But asking about the environment provides a starting point for discussion.
As Silva noted, there have been many efforts to promote the measurement of social impacts. The UN system typically does this by using a human rights/gender equality lens (see UNEG Ethical Guidelines 2008 and UN-SWAP 2006). Many UN agencies also outline this need in their evaluation policies.
Similarly, there are many guidelines for mainstreaming environmental and climate change considerations into programs and policies (UNDP did a stocktake in 2010). UN agencies typically speak to this theme in evaluation guidance documents.
While it would help if TORs asked and budgeted for questions around social and environmental impacts of programming, I agree with Silva that we should advocate for them if these elements are not there.
A challenge I initially faced was, “well, how do we do this?” I’m currently finishing up my dissertation focused on answering this question. Examining previous evaluations of food security programs, I’m finding lots of evidence showing us how, why, and in what context we should integrate these themes.
We should engage with methodological developments from the literature and try them out. Ask questions such as: how do different groups experience this program? And how has climate change affected people's experiences? Share your process and learnings.
Evaluations could play in promoting equity and environmental sustainability, and we must.
Steven