Arlene Lu-Gonzales, Takuji W Tsusaka, Sylvia Szabo, Reuben M J Kadigi, Camilla Blasi Foglietti, Seree Park, Zoe Matthews
{"title":"评估复杂的国际研究促进发展项目对可持续发展目标的贡献。","authors":"Arlene Lu-Gonzales, Takuji W Tsusaka, Sylvia Szabo, Reuben M J Kadigi, Camilla Blasi Foglietti, Seree Park, Zoe Matthews","doi":"10.1057/s41287-022-00573-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While evaluation of research-to-policy projects is a fundamental aspect of measuring the impact of new knowledge, limited studies have examined evaluation methods in such projects, as well as how the evaluation can generate learning to facilitate the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a systematic literature review and found that the most commonly used methods for SDG contribution evaluation were Analytical Hierarchy Process (40.4%), Fuzzy TOPSIS (13.2%) and ELECTRE and SPADE Methodology (3.5% each). Ranking analysis was undertaken to determine priorities among the six \"Big Wins\" as defined for the UKRI-GCRF Trade Hub Project, as a case, where the ranking was exercised by the project partners across the globe. Results revealed that \"nature and social factors\" was better considered in international trade agreements as the priority (36.4%) among others. Moreover, among the four \"mechanisms\" of the project, \"knowledge, networks, and connectivity\" was ranked as the top priority (56.9%), followed by \"capacity building\" (28.5%), \"metrics, tools and models\" (7.2%), and \"improving the knowledge base\" (4.6%). Mapping and evaluation revealed that the Big Wins of the Trade Hub contributed to ten out of the 17 SDGs. The most fulfilled goals were SDG 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production), SDG 15 (Life on Land), and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) in descending order. Furthermore, interaction analysis of the core SDGs revealed both synergy and tradeoff between different outputs. The research articles reviewed for this paper showed no gold standard framework for assessing international development projects against the SDGs. Further research should develop a tool to capture holistic and synergistic contributions of the target outcomes of projects to sustainable development.</p>","PeriodicalId":47650,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Development Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9821358/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Contribution of Complex International Research-for-Development Programmes to the Sustainable Development Goals.\",\"authors\":\"Arlene Lu-Gonzales, Takuji W Tsusaka, Sylvia Szabo, Reuben M J Kadigi, Camilla Blasi Foglietti, Seree Park, Zoe Matthews\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41287-022-00573-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>While evaluation of research-to-policy projects is a fundamental aspect of measuring the impact of new knowledge, limited studies have examined evaluation methods in such projects, as well as how the evaluation can generate learning to facilitate the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a systematic literature review and found that the most commonly used methods for SDG contribution evaluation were Analytical Hierarchy Process (40.4%), Fuzzy TOPSIS (13.2%) and ELECTRE and SPADE Methodology (3.5% each). Ranking analysis was undertaken to determine priorities among the six \\\"Big Wins\\\" as defined for the UKRI-GCRF Trade Hub Project, as a case, where the ranking was exercised by the project partners across the globe. Results revealed that \\\"nature and social factors\\\" was better considered in international trade agreements as the priority (36.4%) among others. Moreover, among the four \\\"mechanisms\\\" of the project, \\\"knowledge, networks, and connectivity\\\" was ranked as the top priority (56.9%), followed by \\\"capacity building\\\" (28.5%), \\\"metrics, tools and models\\\" (7.2%), and \\\"improving the knowledge base\\\" (4.6%). Mapping and evaluation revealed that the Big Wins of the Trade Hub contributed to ten out of the 17 SDGs. The most fulfilled goals were SDG 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production), SDG 15 (Life on Land), and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) in descending order. Furthermore, interaction analysis of the core SDGs revealed both synergy and tradeoff between different outputs. The research articles reviewed for this paper showed no gold standard framework for assessing international development projects against the SDGs. Further research should develop a tool to capture holistic and synergistic contributions of the target outcomes of projects to sustainable development.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Development Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9821358/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Development Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-022-00573-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Development Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-022-00573-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating the Contribution of Complex International Research-for-Development Programmes to the Sustainable Development Goals.
While evaluation of research-to-policy projects is a fundamental aspect of measuring the impact of new knowledge, limited studies have examined evaluation methods in such projects, as well as how the evaluation can generate learning to facilitate the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a systematic literature review and found that the most commonly used methods for SDG contribution evaluation were Analytical Hierarchy Process (40.4%), Fuzzy TOPSIS (13.2%) and ELECTRE and SPADE Methodology (3.5% each). Ranking analysis was undertaken to determine priorities among the six "Big Wins" as defined for the UKRI-GCRF Trade Hub Project, as a case, where the ranking was exercised by the project partners across the globe. Results revealed that "nature and social factors" was better considered in international trade agreements as the priority (36.4%) among others. Moreover, among the four "mechanisms" of the project, "knowledge, networks, and connectivity" was ranked as the top priority (56.9%), followed by "capacity building" (28.5%), "metrics, tools and models" (7.2%), and "improving the knowledge base" (4.6%). Mapping and evaluation revealed that the Big Wins of the Trade Hub contributed to ten out of the 17 SDGs. The most fulfilled goals were SDG 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production), SDG 15 (Life on Land), and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) in descending order. Furthermore, interaction analysis of the core SDGs revealed both synergy and tradeoff between different outputs. The research articles reviewed for this paper showed no gold standard framework for assessing international development projects against the SDGs. Further research should develop a tool to capture holistic and synergistic contributions of the target outcomes of projects to sustainable development.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Development Research (EJDR) redefines and modernises what international development is, recognising the many schools of thought on what human development constitutes. It encourages debate between competing approaches to understanding global development and international social development. The journal is multidisciplinary and welcomes papers that are rooted in any mixture of fields including (but not limited to): development studies, international studies, social policy, sociology, politics, economics, anthropology, education, sustainability, business and management. EJDR explicitly links with development studies, being hosted by European Association of Development Institutes (EADI) and its various initiatives.
As a double-blind peer-reviewed academic journal, we particularly welcome submissions that improve our conceptual understanding of international development processes, or submissions that propose policy and developmental tools by analysing empirical evidence, whether qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods or anecdotal (data use in the journal ranges broadly from narratives and transcripts, through ethnographic and mixed data, to quantitative and survey data). The research methods used in the journal''s articles make explicit the importance of empirical data and the critical interpretation of findings. Authors can use a mixture of theory and data analysis to expand the possibilities for global development.
Submissions must be well-grounded in theory and must also indicate how their findings are relevant to development practitioners in the field and/or policy makers. The journal encourages papers which embody the highest quality standards, and which use an innovative approach. We urge authors who contemplate submitting their work to the EJDR to respond to research already published in this journal, as well as complementary journals and books. We take special efforts to include global voices, and notably voices from the global South. Queries about potential submissions to EJDR can be directed to the Editors.
EJDR understands development to be an ongoing process that affects all communities, societies, states and regions: We therefore do not have a geographical bias, but wherever possible prospective authors should seek to highlight how their study has relevance to researchers and practitioners studying development in different environments. Although many of the papers we publish examine the challenges for developing countries, we recognize that there are important lessons to be derived from the experiences of regions in the developed world.
The EJDR is print-published 6 times a year, in a mix of regular and special theme issues; accepted papers are published on an ongoing basis online. We accept submissions in English and French.