Improving learning and accountability in foreign aid
Paul Clements
World Development, 2020, vol. 125, issue C
Abstract:
Learning and accountability in foreign aid require project comparisons, but the dominant framework for aid evaluation institutionalizes inconsistency. Today, most aid evaluations are organized in terms of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) criteria: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability. Usually the evaluators determine how to apply each criterion. Also, with donor agencies organizing their own evaluation systems, project monitoring tends to be weak and many evaluations are superficial, positively biased, and/or poorly timed. Logically, the most effective way to improve learning and accountability would be to implement independent and consistent evaluation for cost effectiveness. We substantiate and illustrate this argument by explaining why evaluation should be oriented to cost effectiveness and how this could be accomplished by an evaluation association, and by discussing six evaluations of health projects and several documents that summarize many evaluations.
Keywords: Foreign aid; Evaluation; DAC criteria; Cost effectiveness; Health projects (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X19303183
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:125:y:2020:i:c:s0305750x19303183
DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104670
Access Statistics for this article
World Development is currently edited by O. T. Coomes
More articles in World Development from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().