Abstract
Participatory evaluation relies on the principle of active participation by major stakeholders, including the least organised groups, as being fundamental to good evaluation practice. This process presents a number of advantages which can nonetheless become crippling if certain prerequisites are not fulfilled. The goal of our paper is to weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of participation and to examine the conditions necessary for participatory evaluation to achieve its objectives.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bateson G (1972) Steps to an ecology of mind: collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Beywl W (2006) The role of evaluation in democracy: can it be strengthened by evaluation standards? An european perspective. J Multidiscip Eval 6: 10–29
Conseil National de l’Evaluation (1999) L’évaluation au service de l’avenir. Rapport annuel. La Documentation Française, Paris
Cousins JB, Whitmore E (1998) Framing participatory evaluation. New Dir Eval 80: 5–23
Duran P, Monnier E, Smith A (1995) Evaluation à la française. Evaluation 1(1): 45–63
Eckley N (2001) Designing effective assessments: the role of participation, science and governance, and focus. Report of a workshop co-organised by the European Environment Agency and the Global Environmental Assessment Project, Copenhagen, 1–3 March 2001. European Environment Agency Environmental issue report 26, Copenhagen
Estrella M, Gaventa J (1998) Who counts reality? Participatory monitoring and evaluation: a literature review. Institute for Development Studies working paper 70, University of Sussex
Everitt A (1996) Developing critical evaluation. Evaluation 2(2): 173–188
Fetterman, DM, Kaftarian, SJ, Wandersman, A (eds) (1996) Empowerment evaluation: knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability. Sage, London
Floc’hlay B, Plottu E (1998) Democratic evaluation: from empowerment evaluation to public decision-making. Evaluation 4(3): 261–277
Greene JC (2002) Towards evaluation as a public craft and evaluator as stewards of the public good or on listening well. Presentation at the 2002 Australian Evaluation Society International Conference, October/November
Groupe ≪ Evaluation et Développement Durable ≫ Société Française de l’Evaluation (2009) “La participation du développement durable: qui, quand, comment?” Communication aux 9èmes Journées Françaises de l’Evaluation, Marseille
Guba EG, Lincoln YS (1989) Fourth generation evaluation. Sage Publications, London
Hanberger A (2006) Evaluation of and for Democracy. Evaluation 12(1): 17–37
House ER (2005) Promising practices. The many forms of democratic evaluation. The evaluation exchange. The Harvard Family Research Project’s Evaluation Periodical, Cambridge, MA XI(3), p 7
Lethonen M (2006) Deliberative democracy, participation, and OECD peer reviews of environmental policies. Am J Eval 27(2): 185–200
Miller RL, Campbell R (2006) Taking stock of empowerment evaluation. Am J Eval 27(3): 296–319
Patton MQ (1997) Utilisation-focused evaluation: the new century text. Sage, London
Plottu E (1999) Environnement: Principe et méthodologie de l’Evaluation Hiérarchique. Un cadre pour le développement durable et l’analyse de projets. Doctoral thesis, Université de Rennes 1. Jan 5, 447 p
Plottu E, Plottu B (2007) The concept of Total Economic Value of environment: a reconsideration wihtin a hierarchical rationality. Ecol Econ (61):52–61
Plottu B, Plottu E (2009) Approaches to participation in evaluation: some conditions for implementation. Evaluation 15(3): 343–359
Pollitt C (1999) Stunted by stakeholders? Limits to collaborative evaluation. Public Policy Adm 14(2): 77–90
Roy B (1996) Multicriteria methodology for decision analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
Roy B (1999) Decision-aiding today: what should we expect?. In: Gal T, Stewart T, Hanne T (eds) Advances in multicriteria decision making—MCDM models, algorithms, theory, and applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston
Rutherford FP (2000) Strengthening citizen participation in evaluating community development: the case of the EZ/EC learning initiative in Mc Dowell County, West Virginia. In: Estrella M et al (eds) Learning from change: issues and experiences in participatory monitoring and evaluation. Intermediate Technology Publications, London, pp 124–136
Viveret P (1989) L’évaluation des politiques et des actions publiques. Propositions en vue de l’évaluation du revenu minimum d’insertion. Rapport au premier ministre. Paris, La Documentation française
Warren ME (1993) Can participatory democracy produce better selves? Psychological dimensions of Habermas ‘s discursive model of democracy. Polit Psychol 14(2): 209–234
Weaver L, Cousins B (2004) Unpacking the participatory process. J Multidiscip Eval 1: 19–40
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Plottu, B., Plottu, E. Participatory Evaluation: The Virtues for Public Governance, the Constraints on Implementation. Group Decis Negot 20, 805–824 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-010-9212-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-010-9212-8