{"title":"Navigating Metrics: Disparities and Challenges in Project Evaluations Across Global Development Organisations","authors":"Bryan Cook, Elizabeth Jackson, Paul Alexander","doi":"10.1002/jid.70105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study e<i>x</i>amines variations in project evaluation practices among 10 major international development organisations and their alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Based on a mixed-methods analysis of 4112 project evaluation reports (2015–2017 and 2020–2022) across six regions and 11 sectors, it reveals persistent methodological disparities, arising from differences in Likert scales, rubrics and the adoption of OECD-DAC 2019 evaluation criteria revisions. These inconsistencies undermine comparability and accountability. Content analysis shows only approximately 20% of reports explicitly map micro-level project outcomes to specific SDG indicators. Cost analysis highlights widespread transparency gaps and substantial variation in underruns and overruns. Greater harmonisation of evaluation frameworks is essential to strengthen accountability and value for money in ODA flows.</p>","PeriodicalId":47986,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Development","volume":"38 6","pages":"989-998"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jid.70105","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Development","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jid.70105","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study examines variations in project evaluation practices among 10 major international development organisations and their alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Based on a mixed-methods analysis of 4112 project evaluation reports (2015–2017 and 2020–2022) across six regions and 11 sectors, it reveals persistent methodological disparities, arising from differences in Likert scales, rubrics and the adoption of OECD-DAC 2019 evaluation criteria revisions. These inconsistencies undermine comparability and accountability. Content analysis shows only approximately 20% of reports explicitly map micro-level project outcomes to specific SDG indicators. Cost analysis highlights widespread transparency gaps and substantial variation in underruns and overruns. Greater harmonisation of evaluation frameworks is essential to strengthen accountability and value for money in ODA flows.
期刊介绍：
The Journal aims to publish the best research on international development issues in a form that is accessible to practitioners and policy-makers as well as to an academic audience. The main focus is on the social sciences - economics, politics, international relations, sociology and anthropology, as well as development studies - but we also welcome articles that blend the natural and social sciences in addressing the challenges for development. The Journal does not represent any particular school, analytical technique or methodological approach, but aims to publish high quality contributions to ideas, frameworks, policy and practice, including in transitional countries and underdeveloped areas of the Global North as well as the Global South.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
