The challenge of evaluating what is already participatory
by Ángela María Báez-Silva Arias
When we set out to evaluate Co-Inspira, a peacebuilding initiative in Colombia, we knew we were facing an unconventional challenge. This was not about assessing a traditional intervention, but something far more complex: a Systemic Action Research (SAR) process that was, in itself, already a collective exercise in knowledge generation.
How do we evaluate a process that is, by nature, an exercise in Participatory Research? How do we avoid overburdening participants with an additional layer of evaluation work when they are already leading their own knowledge-generation process? In the chapter “Lessons from practicing Inclusive Rigor in the evaluation of a peace initiative in Colombia”, published in the book “Evaluation, Democracy and Transformation”, we share how we approached this methodological challenge through an evaluative learning process guided by the Inclusive Rigor framework.
What happens when those who have historically been evaluated become co-evaluators? How can such a change be fostered, managed, and capitalized upon? Is it possible to promote participatory evaluation from within public institutions? How?
In the third episode of this new podcast season, we share a chapter from the book ‘
I’m genuinely delighted to share a personal take on Chapter 7: Participatory evaluation of a public transport support policy: an inclusion and transformation perspective – Jalisco (Mexico), recently published in the book Evaluation, Democracy and Transformation: Experiences of Participatory Evaluation in Latin America. I co-wrote it with Sugey Salazar and Selene Michi, and together with other colleagues we reflect on what it really means to carry out public policy evaluation using participatory approaches from within the public sector.
In 
Over the past two decades, the movement aimed at achieving evidence-based policies has gained importance and prominence. It holds that policymakers should base their decisions on the best available evidence regarding “what works,” rather than on ideologies or in response to particular interests.
The idea for the document shared in this post was first discussed during a conference on monitoring in Germany. Our objective was to identify literature on broadly applicable quality standards or criteria for monitoring that could be considered nearly universal in their validity and application. While such documents exist for evaluation and research, no comparable paper could be found for monitoring.
The book ‘
Over the last fifteen years, public discourse on development policies and programmes has emphasised the need to reinforce the leading role of civil society in the interventions that implicate them. Increasingly, concepts such as ‘participation’, ‘accompaniment’ and ‘stakeholder perspective’ are heard.
It is with great joy that we share the news of the launch of a new resource in our community of practice and learning EvalParticipativa, aimed at accompanying and illustrating the 