Theory in Practice

There was an interesting back and forth on Twitter a couple of weeks ago as one user vented frustration with the problem of evaluations making unjustifiable quantitative statements based on qualitative analysis. Then another user brought up bias (institutional and personal) which opened a whole other can of worms (or Pandora’s box, if you’re squeamish). As someone who used to commission evaluations and then later do them myself, I was interested to learn more about bias and evaluation results. Fortunately, the kind people of Twitter never fail to provide solid academic research links to their arguments (for once, I’m not being sarcastic).

At a conference last week which focussed on disaster relief and disaster risk reduction in Asia, I had asked a question about the need to focus on local government for DRR implementation, and the reality of that happening anytime soon given that the global framework for DRR was, in fact, global. The speaker pointed to that fact that local leadership was the critical factor in DRR and other issues being properly implemented at the local level. Indeed, this is true. Leadership is the deciding factor in any development success story. However, another participant in the conference raised the issue of changes in leadership - which are frequent at the local level - not just among elected officials but also public servant managers. ‘How can we sustain good policies and practices in DRR when management is always changing?’ she asked. Quite rightly, this is the other side of the coin on bringing policy and practice from the global/national arena to the local level.