Anthropology and impact evaluation: a critical commentary

Elizabeth Harrison

Journal of Development Effectiveness, 2015, vol. 7, issue 2, 146-159

Abstract: Quantitative and quasi-experimental methods have become popular in the evaluation of development impact. In response, several commentators have argued for more effective use of 'mixed methods'. This paper engages with, and builds upon, this current criticism of more quantitatively based impact evaluation from the disciplinary perspective of anthropology. Focusing on one specific evaluation, of an irrigation project in Malawi, it asks what was missed and what was misunderstood in the quantitative focus that was adopted. The paper then reflects on the wider question that is raised of how particular methods and perspectives can take centre stage and produce apparent 'truths' even in the face of evidence pointing in opposite directions. The overall argument is that this is a matter of the politics of knowledge production and of how particular disciplinary perspectives may come to dominate.

Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/19439342.2015.1015436 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:jdevef:v:7:y:2015:i:2:p:146-159

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJDE20

DOI: 10.1080/19439342.2015.1015436

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Development Effectiveness is currently edited by Howard White

More articles in Journal of Development Effectiveness from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().