Suchergebnisse

Developmental evaluation can often question the ethical basis of an intervention in terms of whether it's 'doing the right thing' rather than merely 'doing things right'. Drawing on ideas from critical systems thinking and critical systems heuristics, an evaluation framework with a pro-equity focus is suggested. The framework addresses issues of complexity. It invites theories of change associated with philosophical ethics, and provides a means of surfacing and potentially transforming debilitating relations of power in a complex evaluand. A case study of the long-standing Narmada project in India is used to sketch the workings of the framework. The article describes how the underpinning methodological ideas of critical systems thinking incorporating triple-loop learning can enhance the practice of developmental evaluation.

AbstractThree critiques of participatory development (PD) and their respective challenges for expert support are discussed—(i) the masking of ideological imperatives behind PD, (ii) the depoliticising practice of policy language and (iii) the restrictive space for enabling responsible support from different fields of expertise including science. Drawing on the experience of two interventions—one Guyana based and one European based—three conceptual tools are suggested for dealing with these issues, respectively. First, systems thinking is described from a critical systems perspective, interrogating the legitimacy of boundaries that we use to frame reality. Second, social learning is considered as a complementary policy instrument in which language and communication are regarded as integral to development. Third, critical space for systems thinking and social learning is examined with reference to the limitations of space provided by conventional project management. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

AbstractThree dilemmas of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are described in relation to a proposed triadic critical systems framework based on boundary critique. First, the holistic dilemma of addressing triple bottom line interests in economic, social and environmental issues. This speaks to a 'framework for understanding' in making sense of interrelationships between entities in a complex reality ('getting real'). Second, the dilemma of nurturing cooperation amongst stakeholders having diverse viewpoints. This speaks to a 'framework for practice' in fostering engagement between multiple perspectives based on different boundaries ('getting it right'). A third dilemma of CSR is presented in terms of 'getting a grip'—a concern that speaks to a 'framework for responsibility' in addressing the moral dilemma that any methodology, approach, system or framework can neither be entirely holistic nor appropriately conversant with all perspectives. With this caveat in mind, the paper examines one particularly significant systems tool for addressing CSR dilemmas—critical systems heuristics (CSH). Applying the triadic framework, the potential value of CSH for CSR is surfaced from two contrasting perspectives—the CSR advocate and the CSR adversary. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The need for, and possibilities of, a second-order shift in evaluation practice are explored. Second-order evaluation practice enables an evaluator to improve practice as a skilled practitioner, acknowledging her embeddedness within an evaluand. The article explores evaluation practice as experienced by professional evaluators, using ideas from developmental evaluation coupled with systemic evaluation in the tradition of systems thinking in practice. Systemic evaluation aims to capture systemic sensibilities – the bigger picture – of complex turbulent situations of change underpinning evaluands. Attributes of second-order practice with systemic evaluation are understood as being aligned with both systemic and systematic modes of evaluation praxis. Personal experiences are provided where this juxtaposing praxis has been found wanting. By example, a systems thinking in practice framework is explored as heuristic support for making a second-order practice shift. The article concludes with a discussion of some implications for developments in professionalising evaluation practice and research.

Problems of conventional evaluation models can be understood as an impoverished 'conversation' between realities (of non‐linearity, indeterminate attributes, and ever‐changing context), and models of evaluating such realities. Meanwhile, ideas of systems thinking and complexity science—grouped here under the acronym STCS—struggle to gain currency in the big 'E' world of institutionalized evaluation. Four evaluation practitioners familiar with evaluation tools associated with STCS offer perspectives on issues regarding mainstream uptake of STCS in the big 'E' world. The perspectives collectively suggest three features of practicing systemic evaluation: (i) developing value in conversing between bounded values (evaluations) and unbounded reality (evaluand), with humility; (ii) developing response‐ability with evaluand stakeholders based on reflexivity, with empathy; and (iii) developing adaptive rather than mere contingent use(fulness) of STCS 'tools' as part of evaluation praxis, with inevitable fallibility and an orientation towards bricolage (adaptive use). The features hint towards systemic evaluation as core to a reconfigured notion of developmental evaluation. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Achieving nature conservation goals require grappling with 'wicked' problems. These intractable problems arise from the complexity and dynamism of the social–ecological systems in which they are embedded. To enhance their ability to address these problems, conservation professionals are increasingly looking to the transdisciplines of systems thinking and evaluation, which provide philosophies, theories, methods, tools and approaches that show promise for addressing intractable problems in a variety of other sectors. These transdisciplines come together especially around praxis, i.e., the process by which a theory or idea is enacted, embodied or realized. We present a review and synthesis of the learnings about praxis that have emerged from The Silwood Group, a consortium of conservation professionals, professional evaluators, and complexity and systems thinkers. The Silwood Group believes that for conservation activities to achieve ambitious goals, we should benefit nature without compromising the well-being of people, and that framing a praxis for conservation in the context of social–ecological systems will provide the greatest potential for positive impact. The learnings are presented as four key principles of a 'praxis for effective conservation'. The four principles are: (1) attend to the whole with humility; (2) engage constructively with the values, cultures, politics, and histories of stakeholders; (3) learn through evaluative, systemic enquiry, and (4) exercise wisdom in judgement and action. We also provide descriptions and references for tools and methods to support such praxis and discuss how the thinking and approaches used by conservation professionals can be transformed to achieve greater effectiveness.

While there is growing interest in participatory research to address issues around environmental sustainability, the focus of analysis tends to be on the results or products of the research rather than the processes involved. Addressing this gap, the authors draw on their experience of specific mapping techniques, based on different systemic concepts and theories, that have helped facilitate, explore and capture different understandings of the relationships, perspectives and boundaries within situations involving environmental sustainability. The development of visual mapping techniques is explained and practical case studies describe their application in environmental sustainability projects, from working with farmers and their networks to using visual mapping with indigenous communities and managing coastal environments. Each case study provides a 'real world' project example from researchers with extensive experience of using these techniques to research different aspects of environmental sustainability over several decades