there is widespread agreement that to mainstream, replicate, reproduce, upgrade or
upscale interventions to higher levels is an essential perspective in understanding
causal pathways from the micro-level to higher level goals.
Garcia and Zazueta (2015) argue that at higher scales interventions should be
interpreted and looked at from a systems perspective. Individual components and
elements do not a system make, but when they start interacting, they tend to take on
characteristics of a system, which can have its own dynamics and shifts and
changes. Arguably markets operate as systems and market change is systemic
change: subtle changes in supply, demand and enabling environment can lead to
“tipping points”, after which slow, reversible change becomes irreversible, or the
point in time at which a new technology (such as hydel power) becomes
mainstream.
In conclusion key questions related to time lead to the realisation that impact can
be measured at each moment in time – ex ante as impact assessment, through
modelling and calculations, real time through monitoring, experimental design,
trend analysis etc. and ex post through various evaluations and studies. Key
questions related to space make us realise that impact differs per area and that
areas have different impacts. Key questions related to scale point to the need to
mainstream, replicate, upscale and broaden the scope of interventions before impact
can be achieved at higher levels.
3.5 Using Time and Space to Identify Approaches
In principle the three dimensions of time, space and scale can be used to build a
three dimensional matrix in which the theory of change of an intervention,
programme or policy can be represented. This will enable the evaluator to identify
where a particular demand for impact evidence needs to be placed, and what would
be appropriate analytical tools to evaluate impact. Figure 3.1 presents a matrix of
time and space aspects. The time dimension goes from ex ante (designing and
formulating a new intervention) to important moments in real time (from inception
to mid-term to end-of-project) to ex post and identifies ex post evaluation
approaches. Red “balloons” signify evaluation approaches; blue ones monitoring
and data analysis, whereas a green balloon identifies a research approach. Of course
evaluations use and analyse monitoring data, and often use research tools and
methods. Figure 3.1 just presents a possible configuration of what is dominant in
the matrix from an evaluation perspective. The space dimension goes from local
through national and regional to global, but has an extra row for ecosystems, which
overlap with other rows.
The ex ante column is occupied by ex ante evaluation and impact assessment,
which is a lively community of practice that uses various methods and tools to come
to conclusions on the potential impact that different scenarios may have throughout
time. These impact assessments tend to use modelling as their preferred tool and
may present several scenarios that would lead to different impacts. The ex post
44
R.D. van den Berg
upscale interventions to higher levels is an essential perspective in understanding
causal pathways from the micro-level to higher level goals.
Garcia and Zazueta (2015) argue that at higher scales interventions should be
interpreted and looked at from a systems perspective. Individual components and
elements do not a system make, but when they start interacting, they tend to take on
characteristics of a system, which can have its own dynamics and shifts and
changes. Arguably markets operate as systems and market change is systemic
change: subtle changes in supply, demand and enabling environment can lead to
“tipping points”, after which slow, reversible change becomes irreversible, or the
point in time at which a new technology (such as hydel power) becomes
mainstream.
In conclusion key questions related to time lead to the realisation that impact can
be measured at each moment in time – ex ante as impact assessment, through
modelling and calculations, real time through monitoring, experimental design,
trend analysis etc. and ex post through various evaluations and studies. Key
questions related to space make us realise that impact differs per area and that
areas have different impacts. Key questions related to scale point to the need to
mainstream, replicate, upscale and broaden the scope of interventions before impact
can be achieved at higher levels.
3.5 Using Time and Space to Identify Approaches
In principle the three dimensions of time, space and scale can be used to build a
three dimensional matrix in which the theory of change of an intervention,
programme or policy can be represented. This will enable the evaluator to identify
where a particular demand for impact evidence needs to be placed, and what would
be appropriate analytical tools to evaluate impact. Figure 3.1 presents a matrix of
time and space aspects. The time dimension goes from ex ante (designing and
formulating a new intervention) to important moments in real time (from inception
to mid-term to end-of-project) to ex post and identifies ex post evaluation
approaches. Red “balloons” signify evaluation approaches; blue ones monitoring
and data analysis, whereas a green balloon identifies a research approach. Of course
evaluations use and analyse monitoring data, and often use research tools and
methods. Figure 3.1 just presents a possible configuration of what is dominant in
the matrix from an evaluation perspective. The space dimension goes from local
through national and regional to global, but has an extra row for ecosystems, which
overlap with other rows.
The ex ante column is occupied by ex ante evaluation and impact assessment,
which is a lively community of practice that uses various methods and tools to come
to conclusions on the potential impact that different scenarios may have throughout
time. These impact assessments tend to use modelling as their preferred tool and
may present several scenarios that would lead to different impacts. The ex post
44
R.D. van den Berg