发展评估法庭的可采证据?援外社SHOUHARDO项目对孟加拉国儿童发育迟缓的影响

Lisa C. Smith, Faheem Kahn, Timothy R. Frankenberger, Abdul Wadud
{"title":"发展评估法庭的可采证据?援外社SHOUHARDO项目对孟加拉国儿童发育迟缓的影响","authors":"Lisa C. Smith,&nbsp;Faheem Kahn,&nbsp;Timothy R. Frankenberger,&nbsp;Abdul Wadud","doi":"10.1111/j.2040-0209.2011.00376_2.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Along with the rise of the development effectiveness movement of the last few decades, experimental impact evaluation methods – randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental techniques – have emerged as a dominant force. While the increased use of these methods has contributed to improved understanding of what works and whether specific projects have been successful, their ‘gold standard’ status threatens to exclude a large body of evidence from the development effectiveness dialogue.</p>\n <p>In this paper we conduct an evaluation of the impact on child stunting of CARE's SHOUHARDO project in Bangladesh, the first large-scale project to use the rights-based, livelihoods approach to address malnutrition. In line with calls for a more balanced view of what constitutes rigor and scientific evidence, and for the use of more diversified and holistic methods in impact evaluations, we employ a mixed-methods approach. The results from multiple data sources and methods, including both non-experimental and quasi-experimental, are triangulated to arrive at the conclusions. We find that the project had an extraordinarily large impact on stunting among children 6–24 months old – on the order of a 4.5 percentage point reduction per year. We demonstrate that one reason the project reduced stunting by so much was because, consistent with the rights-based, livelihoods approach, it relied on both direct nutrition interventions and those that addressed underlying structural causes including poor sanitation, poverty, and deeply-entrenched inequalities in power between women and men. These findings have important policy implications given the slow progress in reducing malnutrition globally and that the widely-supported Scaling Up Nutrition initiative aimed at stepping up efforts to do so is in urgent need of guidance on how to integrate structural cause interventions with the direct nutrition interventions that are the initiative's main focus. The evaluation also adds to the evidence that targeting the poor, rather than employing universal coverage, can help to accelerate reductions in child malnutrition. The paper concludes that, given the valuable policy lessons generated, the experience of the SHOUHARDO project merits solid standing in the knowledge bank of development effectiveness. More broadly, it illustrates how rigorous and informative evaluation of complex, multi-intervention projects can be undertaken even in the absence of the randomisation, non-project control groups and/or panel data required by the experimental methods.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100618,"journal":{"name":"IDS Working Papers","volume":"2011 376","pages":"1-43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2011.00376_2.x","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Admissible Evidence in the Court of Development Evaluation? The Impact of CARE's SHOUHARDO Project on Child Stunting in Bangladesh\",\"authors\":\"Lisa C. Smith,&nbsp;Faheem Kahn,&nbsp;Timothy R. Frankenberger,&nbsp;Abdul Wadud\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/j.2040-0209.2011.00376_2.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Along with the rise of the development effectiveness movement of the last few decades, experimental impact evaluation methods – randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental techniques – have emerged as a dominant force. While the increased use of these methods has contributed to improved understanding of what works and whether specific projects have been successful, their ‘gold standard’ status threatens to exclude a large body of evidence from the development effectiveness dialogue.</p>\\n <p>In this paper we conduct an evaluation of the impact on child stunting of CARE's SHOUHARDO project in Bangladesh, the first large-scale project to use the rights-based, livelihoods approach to address malnutrition. In line with calls for a more balanced view of what constitutes rigor and scientific evidence, and for the use of more diversified and holistic methods in impact evaluations, we employ a mixed-methods approach. The results from multiple data sources and methods, including both non-experimental and quasi-experimental, are triangulated to arrive at the conclusions. We find that the project had an extraordinarily large impact on stunting among children 6–24 months old – on the order of a 4.5 percentage point reduction per year. We demonstrate that one reason the project reduced stunting by so much was because, consistent with the rights-based, livelihoods approach, it relied on both direct nutrition interventions and those that addressed underlying structural causes including poor sanitation, poverty, and deeply-entrenched inequalities in power between women and men. These findings have important policy implications given the slow progress in reducing malnutrition globally and that the widely-supported Scaling Up Nutrition initiative aimed at stepping up efforts to do so is in urgent need of guidance on how to integrate structural cause interventions with the direct nutrition interventions that are the initiative's main focus. The evaluation also adds to the evidence that targeting the poor, rather than employing universal coverage, can help to accelerate reductions in child malnutrition. The paper concludes that, given the valuable policy lessons generated, the experience of the SHOUHARDO project merits solid standing in the knowledge bank of development effectiveness. More broadly, it illustrates how rigorous and informative evaluation of complex, multi-intervention projects can be undertaken even in the absence of the randomisation, non-project control groups and/or panel data required by the experimental methods.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100618,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IDS Working Papers\",\"volume\":\"2011 376\",\"pages\":\"1-43\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2011.00376_2.x\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IDS Working Papers\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2011.00376_2.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IDS Working Papers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2011.00376_2.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着过去几十年发展有效性运动的兴起,实验性影响评估方法——随机对照试验和准实验技术——已经成为一种主导力量。尽管越来越多地使用这些方法有助于更好地理解什么有效以及特定项目是否成功,但它们的“黄金标准”地位可能会将大量证据排除在发展有效性对话之外。在本文中,我们对援外社在孟加拉国的SHOUHARDO项目对儿童发育迟缓的影响进行了评估,该项目是第一个采用基于权利和生计的方法解决营养不良问题的大型项目。根据要求对严谨性和科学证据的构成有更平衡的看法,以及在影响评估中使用更多样化和更全面的方法的要求,我们采用了混合方法。来自多个数据源和方法的结果,包括非实验和准实验,被三角化以得出结论。我们发现,该项目对6-24个月大的儿童发育迟缓产生了非常大的影响——大约每年减少4.5个百分点。我们证明,该项目显著减少发育迟缓的一个原因是,与基于权利和生计的方法一致,它既依赖于直接的营养干预,也依赖于解决潜在结构性原因的干预,包括卫生条件差、贫困和根深蒂固的男女权力不平等。鉴于全球在减少营养不良方面进展缓慢,以及得到广泛支持的旨在加大努力减少营养不良的“扩大营养”倡议迫切需要指导,以指导如何将结构性原因干预措施与作为该倡议主要重点的直接营养干预措施相结合,这些发现具有重要的政策意义。评估结果还进一步证明,针对贫困人口,而不是实行全民覆盖,有助于加速减少儿童营养不良。本文的结论是,鉴于产生了宝贵的政策教训,SHOUHARDO项目的经验值得在发展有效性知识库中占有稳固的地位。更广泛地说,它说明了即使在没有随机化、非项目控制组和/或实验方法所需的面板数据的情况下,如何对复杂的、多干预项目进行严格和翔实的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Admissible Evidence in the Court of Development Evaluation? The Impact of CARE's SHOUHARDO Project on Child Stunting in Bangladesh

Along with the rise of the development effectiveness movement of the last few decades, experimental impact evaluation methods – randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental techniques – have emerged as a dominant force. While the increased use of these methods has contributed to improved understanding of what works and whether specific projects have been successful, their ‘gold standard’ status threatens to exclude a large body of evidence from the development effectiveness dialogue.

In this paper we conduct an evaluation of the impact on child stunting of CARE's SHOUHARDO project in Bangladesh, the first large-scale project to use the rights-based, livelihoods approach to address malnutrition. In line with calls for a more balanced view of what constitutes rigor and scientific evidence, and for the use of more diversified and holistic methods in impact evaluations, we employ a mixed-methods approach. The results from multiple data sources and methods, including both non-experimental and quasi-experimental, are triangulated to arrive at the conclusions. We find that the project had an extraordinarily large impact on stunting among children 6–24 months old – on the order of a 4.5 percentage point reduction per year. We demonstrate that one reason the project reduced stunting by so much was because, consistent with the rights-based, livelihoods approach, it relied on both direct nutrition interventions and those that addressed underlying structural causes including poor sanitation, poverty, and deeply-entrenched inequalities in power between women and men. These findings have important policy implications given the slow progress in reducing malnutrition globally and that the widely-supported Scaling Up Nutrition initiative aimed at stepping up efforts to do so is in urgent need of guidance on how to integrate structural cause interventions with the direct nutrition interventions that are the initiative's main focus. The evaluation also adds to the evidence that targeting the poor, rather than employing universal coverage, can help to accelerate reductions in child malnutrition. The paper concludes that, given the valuable policy lessons generated, the experience of the SHOUHARDO project merits solid standing in the knowledge bank of development effectiveness. More broadly, it illustrates how rigorous and informative evaluation of complex, multi-intervention projects can be undertaken even in the absence of the randomisation, non-project control groups and/or panel data required by the experimental methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信