@techreport{clark_insights_2023, address = {Brighton}, title = {Insights for {Influence}: {Understanding} {Impact} {Pathways} in {Crisis} {Response}}, copyright = {This report is distribued under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, reproduction or distribution in any medium, provided the original authors and sources are credited and any modifications or adaptations are indicated.}, shorttitle = {Insights for {Influence}}, url = {https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/20.500.12413/18172}, abstract = {The Covid-19 Responses for Equity (CORE) programme was a three-year initiative funded by the Canadian International Development Research Centre (IDRC) that brought together 20 projects from across the global South to understand the socioeconomic impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic, improve existing responses, and generate better policy options for recovery. The research covered 42 countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East to understand the ways in which the pandemic affected the most vulnerable people and regions, and deepened existing vulnerabilities. Research projects covered a broad range of themes, including macroeconomic policies for support and recovery; supporting essential economic activity and protecting informal businesses, small producers, and women workers; and promoting democratic governance to strengthen accountability, social inclusion, and civil engagement. The Institute of Development Studies (IDS) provided knowledge translation (KT) support to CORE research partners to maximise the learning generated across the research portfolio and deepen engagement with governments, civil society, and the scientific community. As part of this support, the IDS KT team worked with CORE project teams to reconstruct and reflect on their impact pathways to facilitate South-South knowledge exchange on effective strategies for research impact, and share learning on how the CORE cohort has influenced policy and delivered change. This report presents an overview of these impact pathways and the lessons learnt from a selection of the projects chosen to represent the diversity of approaches to engage policymakers, civil society, and the media to generate and share evidence of the effect of the pandemic on diverse vulnerable groups.}, language = {en}, urldate = {2023-11-13}, institution = {Institute of Development Studies}, author = {Clark, Louise and Carpenter, Jo and Taylor, Joe}, month = nov, year = {2023}, note = {Accepted: 2023-11-10T12:56:06Z Publisher: Institute of Development Studies}, } @techreport{burge_seeing_2022, address = {Brighton}, title = {Seeing the {Combined} {Effects} of {Aid} {Programmes}}, copyright = {This is an Open Access briefing distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are credited and any modifications or adaptations are indicated.}, url = {https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/20.500.12413/17391}, abstract = {Multiple aid agencies often try to support change in the same places, at the same time, and with similar actors. Surprisingly, their interactions and combined effects are rarely explored. This Policy Briefing describes findings from research conducted on recent aid programmes that overlapped in Mozambique, Nigeria, and Pakistan, and from a webinar with UK Foreign, Commonwealth \& Development Office (FCDO) advisors and practitioners. The research found three distinct categories of ‘interaction effects’: synergy, parallel play, and disconnect. We explore how using an ‘interaction effects’ lens in practice could inform aid agency strategies and programming.}, language = {en}, number = {196}, urldate = {2022-07-01}, institution = {IDS}, author = {Burge, Richard and Nadelman, Rachel and McGee, Rosie and Fox, Jonathan and Anderson, Colin}, month = may, year = {2022}, note = {Accepted: 2022-05-10T09:42:35Z Publisher: Institute of Development Studies}, } @techreport{barnes_katrina_understanding_2021, address = {Brighton}, title = {Understanding {Governance} from the {Margins}: {What} {Does} {It} {Mean} {In} {Practice}?}, shorttitle = {Understanding {Governance} from the {Margins}}, url = {https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/20.500.12413/16975}, abstract = {What does governance look like ‘from below’ – from the perspectives of poor and marginalised households? How do patterns of conflict affect that? These were the questions at the heart of the Governance at the Margins research project. Over three years from 2017-2020 we worked to explore this through in-depth study in conflict-affected areas of Mozambique, Myanmar, and Pakistan. Our research teams interviewed the same people regularly over that time, finding out how they resolved problems and interacted with authorities. In this paper we connect what we found to the realities and complexities of development practice, drawing on the input of 20 experienced practitioners working in bilateral and multilateral development agencies and international NGOs, who generously gave their time to help us think through the practical implications of our wealth of findings.}, urldate = {2022-01-11}, institution = {Institute of Development Studies (IDS)}, author = {Barnes, Katrina, Katrina, Barnes and Anderson, Colin and de Chassy, Stephanie and Ahmed, Affaf and Ali, Mudabbir and Aung, Myo Min and Chaimite, Egidio and Joshi, Anuradha and Khan, Danyal and Loureiro, Miguel and Posse, Lucio and Rowlands, Jo and Shankland, Alex and Wazir, Rizwan}, month = nov, year = {2021}, doi = {10.19088/A4EA.2021.003}, } @techreport{von_schiller_applying_2020, address = {Bonn}, title = {Applying {Rigorous} {Impact} {Evaluation} in {GIZ} {Governance} {Programmes}: {Results} of a {GIZ} {Initiative} on {Impacts} in {Governance}}, url = {https://www.idos-research.de/uploads/media/giz2021-0020en-rigorous-impact-evaluation-giz-governance-programmes-results.pdf}, abstract = {Pressure is mounting on international development cooperation agencies to prove the impact of their work. Private and public commissioners as well as the general public are increasingly asking for robust evidence of impact. In this context, rigorous impact evaluation (RIE) methods are increasingly receiving attention within the broader German development system and in GIZ. Compared to other implementing agencies such as DFID or USAid, the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH has so far relatively little experience in systematically applying rigorous methods of impact evaluation. This is particularly true in the governance sector. In order to gain more experience and to understand which methods and formats are best suited for GIZ governance programmes, the Governance and Conflict division and the Africa department launched the ‘Impact Initiative Africa’ in 2016, a cooperative effort with several programmes in Africa. The Initiative set out to apply the experiences from GIZ governance programmes to design and conduct RIEs, and to use the results to steer programme implementation. Initially, the Initiative included three countries: Benin (Programme for Decentralisation and Local Development), Malawi (Support to Public Financial and Economic Management) and Mozambique (Good Financial Governance in Mozambique). During its implementation, the Initiative also benefitted from the experience of two additional governance programmes which had already undertaken RIEs, namely Peru (Citizen-oriented State Reform Programme) and Pakistan (Support to Local Governance Programme II). This report summarizes the insights gained from these experiences and discusses opportunities and limitations regarding the use and usability of RIEs in GIZ governance programmes as well as proposals on how to organise RIEs to maximise learning potential and benefits for the specific programmes and the GIZ Governance sector at large.}, urldate = {2023-03-28}, institution = {GIZ GmbH}, author = {von Schiller, Armin}, year = {2020}, } @techreport{nadelman_how_2019, address = {Brighton}, title = {How {Does} the {World} {Bank} {Build} {Citizen} {Engagement} {Commitments} into {Project} {Design}? {Results} from {Pilot} {Assessments} in {Mozambique}, {Myanmar}, {Nigeria}, and {Pakistan}}, copyright = {This is an Open Access paper distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are credited and any modifications or adaptations are indicated. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode}, shorttitle = {How {Does} the {World} {Bank} {Build} {Citizen} {Engagement} {Commitments} into {Project} {Design}?}, url = {https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/123456789/14449}, abstract = {How and to what degree is the World Bank putting its new institutional citizen engagement (CE) commitments into practice? This question guides an independent assessment that the Accountability Research Center (ARC) at American University has undertaken as part of the Institute of Development Studies-led Action for Empowerment and Accountability (A4EA) research programme’s investigation into how external actors can best support local processes of and conditions for empowerment and accountability. This report investigates the World Bank’s incorporation of CE into project design, the critical early stage of donor engagement. To accomplish this, ARC reviewed the World Bank’s fiscal year 2015–17 investment project portfolios for four A4EA priority countries, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nigeria, and Pakistan, which covers 57 projects that range from US\$19 million to U\$600 million. The analysis determines whether projects commit to seeking a strategic approach to CE, which involves combining multiple tactics so that the whole could be greater than the sum of the parts. This assessment of CE commitments is intended to help to inform possible national, civil society organisation strategies to monitor whether and how these commitments are actually implemented in practice.}, language = {en}, urldate = {2019-04-17}, institution = {IDS}, author = {Nadelman, Rachel and Le, Ha and Sah, Anjali}, month = apr, year = {2019}, } @techreport{cooke_how_2017, address = {Oxford}, title = {How to set up and manage an adaptive programme - {Lessons} from the {Action} on {Climate} {Today} ({ACT}) {Programme}}, url = {https://www.opml.co.uk/files/Publications/8617-action-on-climate-today-act/act-adaptive-programme-management.pdf?noredirect=1}, urldate = {2019-02-25}, institution = {OPM}, author = {Cooke, Katherine}, month = jul, year = {2017}, }