A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa

When decision-makers want to use evidence from monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems to assist them in making choices, there is a demand for M&E. When there is great capacity to supply M&E information, but low capacity to demand quality evidence, there is a mismatch between supply and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Stephen Porter, Ian Goldman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: AOSIS 2013-09-01
Series:African Evaluation Journal
Online Access:https://aejonline.org/index.php/aej/article/view/25
id doaj-3932f16640c7498ea9f939ed1348274e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3932f16640c7498ea9f939ed1348274e2020-11-25T01:01:49ZengAOSISAfrican Evaluation Journal2310-49882306-51332013-09-0111e1e910.4102/aej.v1i1.253A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in AfricaStephen Porter0Ian Goldman1Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results for Anglophone Africa and Graduate School of Public and Development Management, University of the WitwatersrandDepartment of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation of the Presidency of South AfricaWhen decision-makers want to use evidence from monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems to assist them in making choices, there is a demand for M&E. When there is great capacity to supply M&E information, but low capacity to demand quality evidence, there is a mismatch between supply and demand. In this context, as Picciotto (2009) observed, ‘monitoring masquerades as evaluation’. This article applies this observation, using six case studies of African M&E systems, by asking: What evidence is there that African governments are developing stronger endogenous demand for evidence generated from M&E systems? The argument presented here is that demand for evidence is increasing, leading to further development of M&E systems, with monitoring being dominant. As part of this dominance there are attempts to align monitoring systems to emerging local demand, whilst donor demands are still important in several countries. There is also evidence of increasing demand through government-led evaluation systems in South Africa, Uganda and Benin. One of the main issues that this article notes is that the M&E systems are not yet conceptualised within a reform effort to introduce a comprehensive results-based orientation to the public services of these countries. Results concepts are not yet consistently applied throughout the M&E systems in the case countries. In addition, the results-based notions that are applied appear to be generating perverse incentives that reinforce upward compliance and contrôle to the detriment of more developmental uses of M&E evidence.https://aejonline.org/index.php/aej/article/view/25
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Stephen Porter
Ian Goldman
spellingShingle Stephen Porter
Ian Goldman
A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa
African Evaluation Journal
author_facet Stephen Porter
Ian Goldman
author_sort Stephen Porter
title A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa
title_short A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa
title_full A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa
title_fullStr A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa
title_full_unstemmed A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa
title_sort growing demand for monitoring and evaluation in africa
publisher AOSIS
series African Evaluation Journal
issn 2310-4988
2306-5133
publishDate 2013-09-01
description When decision-makers want to use evidence from monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems to assist them in making choices, there is a demand for M&E. When there is great capacity to supply M&E information, but low capacity to demand quality evidence, there is a mismatch between supply and demand. In this context, as Picciotto (2009) observed, ‘monitoring masquerades as evaluation’. This article applies this observation, using six case studies of African M&E systems, by asking: What evidence is there that African governments are developing stronger endogenous demand for evidence generated from M&E systems? The argument presented here is that demand for evidence is increasing, leading to further development of M&E systems, with monitoring being dominant. As part of this dominance there are attempts to align monitoring systems to emerging local demand, whilst donor demands are still important in several countries. There is also evidence of increasing demand through government-led evaluation systems in South Africa, Uganda and Benin. One of the main issues that this article notes is that the M&E systems are not yet conceptualised within a reform effort to introduce a comprehensive results-based orientation to the public services of these countries. Results concepts are not yet consistently applied throughout the M&E systems in the case countries. In addition, the results-based notions that are applied appear to be generating perverse incentives that reinforce upward compliance and contrôle to the detriment of more developmental uses of M&E evidence.
url https://aejonline.org/index.php/aej/article/view/25
work_keys_str_mv AT stephenporter agrowingdemandformonitoringandevaluationinafrica
AT iangoldman agrowingdemandformonitoringandevaluationinafrica
AT stephenporter growingdemandformonitoringandevaluationinafrica
AT iangoldman growingdemandformonitoringandevaluationinafrica
_version_ 1725207237774802944