@techreport{gohl_ngo-ideas_2011, address = {Stuttgart}, title = {{NGO}-{IDEAs} {Impact} {Toolbox} - {Participatory} {Monitoring} of {Outcome} and {Impact}}, url = {http://www.ngo-ideas.net/tiny_tools/index.html}, abstract = {NGO-IDEAs (NGO – Impact on Development, Empowerment and Actions) NGO-IDEAs is a cooperation of about 40 non-govermental organisations (NGOs) from South Asia, East Africa and the Philippines and 14 German NGOs working in the field of development cooperation. It identifies and develops jointly with all partners, concepts and tools for NGOs in the areas of Outcome and Impact Assessment and Monitoring \& Evaluation (M\&E). NGO-IDEAs is further being supported by VENRO, the umbrella organisation of development non-governmental organisations in Germany as well as PARITÄT, the legal holder of the project. The Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) has cofinanced the project. NGO-IDEAs is not just another study evaluating the impact of NGOs’ work – it combines research \& development, knowledge management, learning \& training as well as advice \& coaching to initiate a collective learning process for all partners involved. Additionally, NGOIDEAs intends to create a valuable resource base for use by NGOs. NGO-IDEAs aims at: • Empowering community based organisations or groups and the poor among the rural communities to use and practice impact monitoring for project management • Empowering NGOs to further improve the effectiveness, impact and sustainability of their efforts • Making social changes more visible for implementing and funding NGOs, thus improving development practice • Improving public recognition of NGOs and CBOs and their contribution to development. The NGO-IDEAs “Impact Toolbox” is to enable NGOs and grassroots organisations to monitor projects together with the so called target groups involved, in a manner that will enhance positive outcomes and impacts, and reduce negative ones. It focuses on joint setting of goals, on monitoring them and finally on taking joint decisions about the further design and direction of interventions. The instruments of the NGO-IDEAs “Impact Toolbox” are simple and participatory. Simple means: setting out from people’s knowledge and know-how, therefore, easy to understand and apply. Application can easily be fitted into the “normal” activities of the NGOs or grassroots organisations. The participatory character emerges through democratic elements promoting a “Culture of Learning” that the people can assimilate}, language = {en}, urldate = {2023-07-14}, institution = {Impact+}, author = {Gohl, Eberhard and Causemann, Bernward}, year = {2011}, } @techreport{causemann_tiny_2012, address = {Stuttgart}, title = {Tiny {Tools} - {Measuring} {Change} in {Communities} and {Groups}}, url = {http://www.ngo-ideas.net/tiny_tools/index.html}, abstract = {Introduction to the Overview: Tiny Tools Why “Tiny Tools” for assessing change? Currently, change is mostly assessed by NGO staff or external experts. The vision of this paper is that communities assess and reflect change themselves and make use of that reflection with appropriate tools. All the tools presented here are relatively quick and easy to learn (therefore “tiny”). With Tiny Tools we can assess change in one session. They can therefore be used where there are not baselines. They are structured and systematic, and they are all widely tested: Experience shows that these tools lead to new insights, mobilise enthusiasm and increase the capacity of communities to bring about further change. The Tiny Tools are in line with what Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) wanted to achieve. Many are slight variations of PRA tools. For a detailed description of concepts, see the NGO-IDEAs Impact Toolbox (www.ngo-ideas.net/impact\_toolbox) and the NGO-IDEAs Manual Self-Effectiveness (www.ngo-ideas.net/monitoring\_self\_effectiveness). The tools are designed to visualise change, but also enable communities to reflect on the reasons of change or verify assessments. They may be implemented once or continuously over time. We know that the time of community members is precious, and limited. Therefore all Tiny Tools can be performed in a relatively short session, provided facilitators (it could be field staff or project officers) are experienced – and the community knows and trusts them. The amount of time spent on the application of the tools may however be prolonged according to the needs of a community or NGO. All of these tools are easy to learn for a facilitator experienced in participatory processes. Which tool should be introduced to which community? It is typically the decision of a development organisation (or external experts) which tools they want to introduce into a community. The staff need to assess which tool will lead to learning and action. It could also be that the staff realise aspects of change that they do not understand well enough. These tools are good for exploring change that we have not planned for and not anticipated. They are also good for exploring change in a context where we have no prior information. Communities are the best experts for their situation, but we emphasise that the tools should be used in ways that benefit and empower the communities or individuals participating. The tool implementations should lead to consequences on the grassroots as well as the NGO level. All Tiny Tools can be integrated into PIAR, the Analysis tool in the NGO-IDEAs Impact Toolbox. Also, the Tiny Tools can help to prepare for the application of the Toolbox tools. They help to make people aware of changes that can be observed. The following box gives some hints how Tiny Tools relate to the Impact Toolbox tools, and to what extent they help to attribute change to development interventions.}, language = {en}, urldate = {2023-07-14}, institution = {Impact+}, author = {Causemann, Bernward and Gohl, Eberhard and Brenner, Verena}, month = jan, year = {2012}, } @article{madsen_implementation_2017, title = {Implementation of the first adaptive management plan for a {European} migratory waterbird population: {The} case of the {Svalbard} pink-footed goose {Anser} brachyrhynchus}, volume = {46}, issn = {1654-7209}, shorttitle = {Implementation of the first adaptive management plan for a {European} migratory waterbird population}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0888-0}, doi = {10.1007/s13280-016-0888-0}, abstract = {An International Species Management Plan for the Svalbard population of the pink-footed goose was adopted under the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds in 2012, the first case of adaptive management of a migratory waterbird population in Europe. An international working group (including statutory agencies, NGO representatives and experts) agreed on objectives and actions to maintain the population in favourable conservation status, while accounting for biodiversity, economic and recreational interests. Agreements include setting a population target to reduce agricultural conflicts and avoid tundra degradation, and using hunting in some range states to maintain stable population size. As part of the adaptive management procedures, adjustment to harvest is made annually subject to population status. This has required streamlining of monitoring and assessment activities. Three years after implementation, indicators suggest the attainment of management results. Dialogue, consensus-building and engagement among stakeholders represent the major process achievements.}, language = {en}, number = {2}, urldate = {2019-02-25}, journal = {Ambio}, author = {Madsen, Jesper and Williams, James Henty and Johnson, Fred A. and Tombre, Ingunn M. and Dereliev, Sergey and Kuijken, Eckhart}, month = mar, year = {2017}, keywords = {Adaptive harvest management, Human–wildlife conflict, Population target, Stakeholder involvement, Structured decision-making, Tundra degradation}, pages = {275--289}, } @techreport{oecd_case_2017, type = {{OECD} {Development} {Cooperation} {Policy} {Papers}}, title = {Case studies of results-based management by providers: {Switzerland}}, url = {https://www.oecd.org/dac/results-development/results-based-approaches/}, language = {en}, urldate = {2019-03-08}, institution = {OECD}, author = {OECD}, month = may, year = {2017}, doi = {10.1787/544032a1-en}, } @techreport{oecd_case_2017, type = {{OECD} {Development} {Cooperation} {Policy} {Papers}}, title = {Case studies of results-based management by providers: {The} {Netherlands}}, url = {https://www.oecd.org/dac/results-development/results-based-approaches/}, language = {en}, urldate = {2019-03-08}, institution = {OECD}, author = {OECD}, month = may, year = {2017}, doi = {10.1787/544032a1-en}, } @techreport{oecd_case_2017, type = {{OECD} {Development} {Cooperation} {Policy} {Papers}}, title = {Case studies of results-based management by providers: {United} {Kingdom}}, url = {https://www.oecd.org/dac/results-development/results-based-approaches/}, language = {en}, urldate = {2019-03-08}, institution = {OECD}, author = {OECD}, month = may, year = {2017}, doi = {10.1787/544032a1-en}, } @techreport{pena-lopez_theory_2020, address = {Barcelona}, title = {A {Theory} of {Change} of citizen participation: an update}, shorttitle = {A {Theory} of {Change} of citizen participation}, url = {https://www.academia.edu/42805069/A_Theory_of_Change_of_citizen_participation_an_update}, abstract = {when it was reduced to a subsidiary internal service lacking all kind of political attributions. The work done in those years had been formidable, but too many things had passed since, especially the 15M Spanish Indignados Movement, the raise of technopolitics… and the raise of populism and fascism all across Europe. We urgently needed a theoretical framework in which to substantiate our political strategy, so I came up with a Theory of Change of citizen participation (see Figure 1) which defined four expected impacts of our political action: 1. Efficiency, efficacy and legitimacy of public decisions improves. 2. Populism has decreased in institutions and the public sphere. 3. Citizens understand the complexity of public decision-making. 4. Citizen participation and political engagement clearly shifts towards a technopolitical paradigm. These impacts were expected to be achieved after some outcomes resulting from some outputs grouped in five programmes: 1. Programme of citizen participation. 2. Programme of internal participation. 3. Programme of collaboration. 4. Programme of intermediaries, facilitators and infomediaries. 5. Programme of e-participation, e-voting and technopolitics. 20 months after, the Theory of Change of Citizen Participation has worked quite well. But it does have some limitations, especially at the operational level-which is what the whole thing was about, to help in putting some order in our daily work.}, language = {en}, urldate = {2020-10-15}, institution = {ICTlogy}, author = {Peña-López, Ismael}, year = {2020}, } @book{andrews_pdia_2021, address = {Cambridge, MA}, title = {{PDIA} in action}, url = {https://bsc.cid.harvard.edu/files/bsc/files/pdia_book_square_final.pdf}, abstract = {Learning from our experience in 2020, we asked the alumni of our HKS Implementing Public Policy (IPP) Executive Education program, if they wanted to work with our students on their nominated problems. Eight IPP alumni, William Keith Young, Adaeze Oreh, Milzy Carrasco, Kevin Schilling, Artem Shaipov, George Imbenzi, David Wuyep, and Raphael Kenigsberg, who had been trained on PDIA and implementation, signed up to work with our students. Thirty-seven students signed up to take the course beginning January 26th, 2021. The students worked across eight teams and adopted a problem driven approach to foster learning that could help their authorizers develop an action learning strategy to their nominated challenge. This book highlights the students’ work drawing from their blogs as well as the event series. There are 8 sections, one for each of the teams and the problems they worked on during the course. We hope you enjoy reading their stories! Scan the QR Code at the end of each section to learn more.}, urldate = {2021-12-16}, publisher = {Center for International Development, Harvard University}, editor = {Andrews, Matt and Samji, Salimah}, month = may, year = {2021}, } @techreport{dppd_dppd_2021, title = {{DPPD} {Handbook}. {A} step-by-step guide for development practitioners to apply the {Data} {Powered} {Positive} {Deviance} method}, url = {https://static1.squarespace.com/static/614dae085246883818475c39/t/619f7f163ed02a77d13fd1bd/1637842759939/DPPD+Handbook+Nov+2021.pdf}, abstract = {The Method Positive Deviance (PD) is based on the observation that in every community or organization, there are a few individuals who achieve significantly better outcomes than their peers, despite having similar challenges and resources. These individuals are referred to as positive deviants, and adopting their solutions is what is referred to as the PD approach¹. The method described in this Handbook follows the same logic as the PD approach but uses pre-existing, non-traditional data sources instead of — or in conjunction with — traditional data sources. Non-traditional data in this context broadly refers to data that is digitally captured (e.g. mobile phone records and financial data), mediated (e.g. social media and online data), or observed (e.g. satellite imagery). The integration of such data to complement traditional data sources generally used in PD is what we refer to as Data Powered Positive Deviance² (DPPD). The digital data opportunity Recent developments in the availability of digital data provide an opportunity to look for positive deviants³ in new ways and in unprecedented geographical and on temporal scales. A number of studies⁴ have described the challenges related to the application of the PD approach in development. Given these challenges, there are obvious opportunities for innovation in PD and our particular interest here is in the innovative opportunities offered by non-traditional data, following the increasing “datafication” of development and the growing availability of big datasets in a variety of development sectors⁵. DPPD builds on this and expands our ability to extract value from non-traditional digital data while providing a systematic process for leveraging local know-how and the collective wisdom of communities. Data Powered Positive Deviance The DPPD method described in this Handbook emerged from a process of research and testing and follows the same stages as the PD approach. The difference is that DPPD integrates pre-existing, non-traditional data across the five stages, requiring a series of new and specific methods and practices that are not required in the PD approach. The first stage is also somewhat different because it not only defines the problem, but it also checks if it is suitable and feasible to use the DPPD method for the proposed project. Table 1 lists the five stages of the DPPD method. This Handbook dedicates a section to each stage. Stage 1 Assess problem-method fit Stage 2 Determine positive deviants Stage 3 Discover underlying factors Stage 4 Design and implement interventions Stage 5 Monitor and evaluate}, urldate = {2021-11-25}, institution = {DPPD Initiative}, author = {DPPD}, month = nov, year = {2021}, } @techreport{lowe_human_2022, address = {London}, title = {Human {Learning} {Systems}: {A} practical guide for the curious}, url = {https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/partnering-for-learning/human-learning-systems/a-practical-guide-for-the-curious48hjg7}, abstract = {Our new guide provides practical advice to help any organisation working in public service apply the Human Learning Systems approach to their work. In doing so, they will be better equipped to explore, learn and respond to the unique strengths and needs of each person, family and community they serve.}, urldate = {2022-08-02}, institution = {Centre for Public Impact}, author = {Lowe, Toby and Padmanabhan, Chandrima and McCart, Des and McNeill, Karen and Brogan, Andy and Smith, Mark}, year = {2022}, }