The integrated development program, a cross-sectional development approach targeting a specific region or village, is receiving increasing attention as the 2030 agenda emphasizes a holistic approach in solving the poverty problem. The conventional evaluation designed for a causal inference of project-level outcome is incapable of reflecting the characteristics of the integrated development program. In this regard, we analyzed the unique features of the integrated development program by applying policy design theory to identify the challenges of evaluating this type of program. We then derived the logic of causal inference from the generative causation approach to resolve these challenges and developed practical evaluation tools, including causal maps and the evaluation matrix. These tools can be applied to respond to the evaluation questions related to the characteristics of the integrated development program, such as chain of causality, interactions between the outcomes, and many-to-many correspondence between aid-providers and recipients.
CapanoGHowlettM (2019) Causal logic and mechanisms in policy design: How and why adopting a mechanistic perspective can improve policy design. Public Policy and Administration32(2): 141–62.
5.
CeptureanuSICeptureanuEGLuchianCE, et al. (2018) Community based programs sustainability. A multi-dimensional analysis of sustainability factors. Sustainability10(3): 870.
6.
ChoY (2016) The study of self-sustenance in the community development model: A case study of World Vision’s model called “self-sustaining village for children.”International Development and Cooperation Review8(3): 37–72.
7.
ColeDCLevinCLoechlC, et al. (2016) Planning an integrated agriculture and health program and designing its evaluation: Experience from Western Kenya. Evaluation and Program Planning56: 11–22.
8.
El SawyOAMalhotraAParkY, et al. (2010) Seeking the configurations of digital ecodynamics: It takes three to Tango. Information Systems Research21(4): 835–48.
HowlettM (2018) The criteria for effective policy design: Character and context in policy instrument choice. Journal of Asian Public Policy11(3): 245–66.
12.
HowlettMMukherjeeI (2018) The contribution of comparative policy analysis to policy design: Articulating principles of effectiveness and clarifying design spaces. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice20(1): 72–87.
13.
HowlettMRaynerJ (2013) Patching versus packaging in policy formulation: Assessing policy portfolio design. Politics and Governance1(2): 170–82.
JonesHHearnS (2009) Outcome Mapping: A Realistic Alternative for Planning Monitoring and Evaluation (Background Note). London: Overseas Development Institute. Available at: https://odi.org/documents/837/5058.pdf (accessed 9 March 2023).
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2019) Better Criteria for Better Evaluation: Revised Evaluation Criteria Definitions and Principles for Use OECD/DAC Network on Development Evaluation. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/revised-evaluation-criteria-dec-2019.pdf (accessed 9 March 2023).
20.
ParkAWangS (2010) Community-based development and poverty alleviation: An evaluation of China’s poor village investment program. Journal of Public Economics94(9–10): 790–9.
21.
PawsonR (2008) Causality for beginners. In: NCRM research methods festival 2008, Leeds, 7December. Available at: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/245/ (accessed 9 March 2023).
22.
PronykPMMunizMNemserB, et al. (2012) The effect of an integrated multisector model for achieving the Millennium Development Goals and improving child survival in rural sub-Saharan Africa: A non-randomized controlled assessment. The Lancet379(9827): 2179–88.
23.
PuntonMVogelI (2020) Keeping it real: Using mechanisms to promote use in the realist evaluation of the building capacity to use research evidence program. New Directions for Evaluation2020(167): 87–100.
24.
RemansRPronykPMFanzoJC, et al. (2011) Multisector intervention to accelerate reductions in child stunting: An observational study from 9 Sub-Saharan African countries. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition94(6): 1632–42.
25.
RihouxBRaginCC (2008) Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques (Applied Social Research Methods). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
26.
RogersPJ (2008) Using programme theory to evaluate complicated and complex aspects of interventions. Evaluation14(1): 29–48.
United Nations Development Programme Independent Evaluation Office (UNDP IEO) (2019) UNDP Evaluation Guidelines. New York: UNDP IEO. Available at: http://web.undp.org/evaluation/guideline/ (accessed 9 March 2023).
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
