How and why are Theory of Change and Realist Evaluation used in food security contexts? A scoping review |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada;2. School of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada;3. School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada;1. Department of Population Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine, 3901 Rainbow Blvd., Mail Stop 3044, Kansas City, KS 66160, United States;2. Department of Sociology, University of Kansas, 1415 Jayhawk Blvd., 716 Fraser Hall, Lawrence, KS 66045-7540, United States;3. KC CARE, 3515 Broadway, Kansas City, MO 64111, United States;4. Health Forward Foundation, 2300 Main, Suite 304, Kansas City, MO 64108, United States;1. MEASURE Evaluation, Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States;2. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States;3. Department of Maternal and Child Health, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States;4. Public Health Leadership Program, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States;5. Carolina Health Informatics Program, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States;1. RTI International, 307 Waverly Oaks Road, Waltham, MA, 0245, USA;2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd., Atlanta, GA, USA;1. Queen’s University, School of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Kingston, ON, Canada;2. Exercise is Medicine Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada;3. Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology, Canada |
| |
| Abstract: | The complex ways in which food security actions lead to nutrition and other health outcomes make it important to clarify what programs work and how, with theory-driven evaluation emerging as a promising approach to evaluate complex programs. However, it is unclear how and why theory-driven evaluation is applied in food security contexts. Our objective is to examine the development and use of Theory of Change and Realist Evaluation to support food security programs globally. Using a systematic search and screening process, we included studies that described a food security program, used a Theory of Change or Realist Evaluation, and presented original research or evaluations. We found a total of 59 relevant Theory of Change studies and eight Realist Evaluation studies. Based on our analysis, Theories of Change arose in response to three main problems: 1) the need to evaluate under complexity; 2) challenges with evaluation; and, 3) information gaps surrounding a program. In contrast, Realist Evaluation was reported to be developed primarily to understand a program’s outcomes. Reflecting on the problem to be addressed in the evaluation would help improve understandings of the evaluation context, which would then inform the choice and design of an evaluation approach. |
| |
| Keywords: | Theory of Change Realist Evaluation Food security Scoping review Program theory |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
