{"title":"Mechanisms for institutionalising evaluation: A scoping review","authors":"Carla Cordoncillo Acosta","doi":"10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2025.102710","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In recent years, there has been growing attention garnered by the institutionalisation of evaluation, with academia as well as international organisations, governments and practitioners engaging more with the topic<em>.</em> Recent publications, in particular the books edited by Stockmann and Meyer (2020, 2022, 2023) that bring together various experiences occurring in different European, American and Asian countries, have contributed significantly to the conceptual and theoretical development of the field. However, the predominant analytical frameworks used to assess institutionalisation are primarily designed to support international comparisons and to quantify the degree of institutionalisation across countries. As such, they tend to emphasise measurable indicators or enabling conditions, often overlooking the specific mechanisms and institutional arrangements that underpin the development and sustainability of evaluative practices. This article addresses that gap by conducting a scoping review of 29 case studies from 12 countries with different evaluation traditions. Rather than focusing on levels of institutionalisation, the analysis identifies and categorises the institutional arrangements and mechanisms most frequently used to embed evaluation within public administration. In doing so, it offers a structured overview intended to support public sector managers—particularly in contexts with limited evaluation traditions—in reflecting on and designing appropriate strategies to strengthen evaluation systems.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48046,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation and Program Planning","volume":"114 ","pages":"Article 102710"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation and Program Planning","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718925001776","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In recent years, there has been growing attention garnered by the institutionalisation of evaluation, with academia as well as international organisations, governments and practitioners engaging more with the topic. Recent publications, in particular the books edited by Stockmann and Meyer (2020, 2022, 2023) that bring together various experiences occurring in different European, American and Asian countries, have contributed significantly to the conceptual and theoretical development of the field. However, the predominant analytical frameworks used to assess institutionalisation are primarily designed to support international comparisons and to quantify the degree of institutionalisation across countries. As such, they tend to emphasise measurable indicators or enabling conditions, often overlooking the specific mechanisms and institutional arrangements that underpin the development and sustainability of evaluative practices. This article addresses that gap by conducting a scoping review of 29 case studies from 12 countries with different evaluation traditions. Rather than focusing on levels of institutionalisation, the analysis identifies and categorises the institutional arrangements and mechanisms most frequently used to embed evaluation within public administration. In doing so, it offers a structured overview intended to support public sector managers—particularly in contexts with limited evaluation traditions—in reflecting on and designing appropriate strategies to strengthen evaluation systems.
期刊介绍:
Evaluation and Program Planning is based on the principle that the techniques and methods of evaluation and planning transcend the boundaries of specific fields and that relevant contributions to these areas come from people representing many different positions, intellectual traditions, and interests. In order to further the development of evaluation and planning, we publish articles from the private and public sectors in a wide range of areas: organizational development and behavior, training, planning, human resource development, health and mental, social services, mental retardation, corrections, substance abuse, and education.