In a world faced with unprecedented rising levels of inequality and injustice, is there a responsibility for our evaluation organizations to take on a leadership role in promoting inclusive, evaluative dialog and deliberation about the state of our democracies in relation to key democratic principles and ideals? In this forum, I question whether it is enough for us to rely on evaluators and evaluations to promote key democratic purposes and ideals.
ChelimskyE. (2006). The purposes of evaluation in a democratic society. In ShawI.GreeneJ.MarkM. (Eds)., The sage handbook of evaluation (pp. 33–55). London, England: Sage.
2.
GreeneJ. (2006). Evaluation, democracy, and social change. In ShawI.GreeneJ.MarkM. (Eds.), The sage handbook of evaluation (pp. 118–140). London, England: Sage.
3.
HouseE.HoweK. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
O'RiordanT. (2012). On social sustainability in a world of limits facing prolonged austerity. Sustainability, Science, Practice and Policy, 12, 1–2.
8.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Weiss' call for humility: Further reflections. American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 231–233.
9.
PerryB. (2012). Household incomes in New Zealand: Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2011. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Social Development.
10.
PorterS. (2013). Moving beyond teaching people to fish. The role of voluntary organizations for professional evaluation in sustainable learning strategies through innovation and intermediation. In SegoneM.RughJ. (Eds.), Evaluation and civil society; Stakeholders’ perspectives on national evaluation capacity development (pp. 52–70). New York, NY: Unicef, Eval Partners, IOCE.
11.
SchwandtT.BurgonH. (2006). Evaluation and the study of lived experience. In ShawI.GreeneJ.MarkM. (Eds.), The sage handbook of evaluation (pp. 98–117). London, England: Sage.
