1 / 15

Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement. April 26, 2013 in Washington, DC Jesper Johnsøn, U4/CMI. A. Some projects. Focus on the missing middle ( outcomes ). Theories of change Cost-effectiveness /- benefit analysis framework for AC ( mainstreaming )

shino
Download Presentation

Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement April 26, 2013 in Washington, DC Jesper Johnsøn, U4/CMI

  2. A. Someprojects Focusonthemissingmiddle (outcomes) • Theoriesofchange • Cost-effectiveness/-benefitanalysisframework for AC (mainstreaming) • Proxy indicators, in baskets • Adaptingevaluationmethods to GAC

  3. Theoriesofchange in anti-corruptionwork • Theory-basedevaluationtradition, goingbeyondlogframes and resultchains, focusonpreconditions, interdependencies and complexity • Supports indicatordevelopment, data collection • 5-step tailoredmethodology

  4. Accountability and Integrity Initiative, Afghanistan

  5. Accountability and Integrity Initiative, Afghanistan

  6. Accountability and Integrity Initiative, Afghanistan

  7. Cost-effectiveness/benefitanalysisframework • CEA = compares costs to an overall effectiveness measure, outcome level • # bribes, integrity scores, “missing” expenditures, recovered assets, student scores, maternal health • Main challenge = identifying same single quantifiable effectiveness measure • Opportunity = AC impactdoes not have to be measured via corruptionlevels (mainstreaming)

  8. CEA of different anti-corruptioninterventions

  9. CEA of AC package in sector programmes

  10. Work plan A. Build up body ofknowledge from pastwork: • Mapexistingacademicliteratureusing CEA/CBA methods (done) • Reconstruct CEA/CBA ratios (resource intensive) B. Applymethodology to programmes under design • Formative, operationalresearch • Benefit from piloting, sequencing, and randomisation

  11. B. Response to questions • Q1-4: Beginwith problem analysis/informationneedsdefinedesiredoutcomes (hard)/questions developindicators. • Indicatorsoftentheeasy part (unlessyouwantone for everything) • Skipping straight to standardisedindicatorscould be prescriptive • Q1: Actionableindicators = reform indicators? • Different levelofresults – overall performance vs. specific reform • Overall performanceindicatorscan be widelystandardised, specific reforms cannot . Proxy indicator baskets, LSMS? • Q3: Cannotprovide reliable, comprehensive data onthecheap • Alreadymuchinnovation (BEEPS, PETS, QSDS, PAPI, GCB, Afrobarometer, GI/Indaba). • Relyonproxies for non-quantifiablesocialphenomena. • Combine different types ofindicators (includingproxies) in country-specific baskets, a la LSMS (poverty) • Need indicators at different levels of results

  12. Code ofConductexample, levelofresults

  13. Code ofConductexample, building an impact story

More Related