跨国倡导评估中的谈判有效性。

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Evaluation Pub Date : 2018-01-01 Epub Date: 2017-10-04 DOI:10.1177/1356389017733210
Bodille Arensman, Margit van Wessel
{"title":"跨国倡导评估中的谈判有效性。","authors":"Bodille Arensman,&nbsp;Margit van Wessel","doi":"10.1177/1356389017733210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>International development organizations increasingly use advocacy as a strategy to pursue effectiveness. However, establishing the effectiveness of advocacy is problematic and dependent on the interpretations of the stakeholders involved, as well as the interactions between them. This article challenges the idea of objective and rational evaluation, showing that advocacy evaluation is an inherently political process in which space for interactions around methods, processes and results defines how effectiveness is interpreted, measured and presented. In addition, this article demonstrates how this space for interaction contributes to the quality and accuracy of evaluating advocacy effectiveness by providing room to explore and address the multiplicities of meaning around identifying, measuring and presenting outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":47511,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation","volume":"24 1","pages":"51-68"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1356389017733210","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Negotiating effectiveness in transnational advocacy evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"Bodille Arensman,&nbsp;Margit van Wessel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1356389017733210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>International development organizations increasingly use advocacy as a strategy to pursue effectiveness. However, establishing the effectiveness of advocacy is problematic and dependent on the interpretations of the stakeholders involved, as well as the interactions between them. This article challenges the idea of objective and rational evaluation, showing that advocacy evaluation is an inherently political process in which space for interactions around methods, processes and results defines how effectiveness is interpreted, measured and presented. In addition, this article demonstrates how this space for interaction contributes to the quality and accuracy of evaluating advocacy effectiveness by providing room to explore and address the multiplicities of meaning around identifying, measuring and presenting outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"51-68\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1356389017733210\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389017733210\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/10/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389017733210","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/10/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

国际发展组织越来越多地将宣传作为一种追求实效的战略。然而,建立倡导的有效性是有问题的,取决于所涉及的利益相关者的解释,以及他们之间的相互作用。本文挑战了客观和理性评估的概念,表明倡导评估本质上是一个政治过程,在这个过程中,围绕方法、过程和结果的互动空间决定了如何解释、衡量和呈现有效性。此外,本文还展示了这种互动空间如何通过提供空间来探索和解决围绕识别、衡量和呈现结果的意义的多样性,从而有助于评估倡导效果的质量和准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Negotiating effectiveness in transnational advocacy evaluation.

Negotiating effectiveness in transnational advocacy evaluation.

International development organizations increasingly use advocacy as a strategy to pursue effectiveness. However, establishing the effectiveness of advocacy is problematic and dependent on the interpretations of the stakeholders involved, as well as the interactions between them. This article challenges the idea of objective and rational evaluation, showing that advocacy evaluation is an inherently political process in which space for interactions around methods, processes and results defines how effectiveness is interpreted, measured and presented. In addition, this article demonstrates how this space for interaction contributes to the quality and accuracy of evaluating advocacy effectiveness by providing room to explore and address the multiplicities of meaning around identifying, measuring and presenting outcomes.

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
Evaluation
Evaluation SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
35
×
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