Experiences with systematic triangulation at the Global Environment Facility |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Social Work, Umeå University, SE-901 87 Umeå, Sweden;2. DM-STAT, One Salem Street Suite 300, Malden, MA 02148 USA;3. Center for Addictions Research and Services, Boston University School of Social Work, 264 Bay State Road, Boston, MA 02215 USA;4. Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, Boston, MA 02118 USA;1. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, Asheville, NC 28804, United States;2. Georgia Southern University, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Department of Community Health Behavior & Education, Statesboro, GA 30460, United States;3. University of South Florida, Department of Educational Measurement and Research, Tampa, FL 33620, United States;1. Department of Educational Research, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster LA1 4YW, United Kingdom;2. Family and Community Social Services Program, University of Guelph-Humber, 207 Humber College Blvd., Toronto, ON, M9W 5L7, Canada;1. Oregon State University, 118B Milam Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, United States;2. California State University, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States;3. University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States;4. University of Maryland, College Park, Columbia, MD, United States;5. Yale University, CT, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | Systematic triangulation may address common challenges in evaluation, such as the scarcity or unreliability of data, or the complexities of comparing and cross-checking evidence from diverse disciplines. Used to identify key evaluation findings, its application has proven to be effective in addressing the limitations encountered in country-level evaluation analysis conducted by the Independent Evaluation Office of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). These include the scarcity or unreliability of national statistics on environmental indicators and data series, especially in Least Developed Countries; challenges in evaluating the impacts of GEF projects; and inherent difficulties in defining the GEF portfolio of projects prior to the undertaking of the evaluation. In addition to responding to the need for further developing triangulation protocols, procedures and/or methodologies advocated by some authors, the approach offers a contribution to evaluation practice. This applies particularly to those evaluation units tasked with country-level evaluations in international organizations, facing similar constraints. |
| |
| Keywords: | Triangulation Mixed methods Evaluation findings Environmental evaluation Country evaluation |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
