Tag Archives: A4R

have evidence, will… um, erm (5 of 6, revisibility)

this is part of a series of joint posts with suvojit. it is also cross-posted at people, spaces, deliberation. throughout this series of posts (1, 2, 3, 4), we have considered two main issues. first, how can evidence and evaluation be shaped to be made more useful – that is, directly useable – in guidingContinue reading “have evidence, will… um, erm (5 of 6, revisibility)”

have evidence, will… um, erm? (4 of 6, going public)

this is a joint post with suvojit. it is also posted on people, spaces, deliberation. in our last post, we discussed how establishing “relevant reasons” for decision-making ex ante may enhance the legitimacy and fairness of deliberations on resource allocation. we also highlight that setting relevant decision-making criteria can inform evaluation design by highlighting whatContinue reading “have evidence, will… um, erm? (4 of 6, going public)”

have evidence, will… um, erm (2 of 2)

this is the second in a series of posts with suvojit (and cross-posted here), initially planned as a series of two but growing to six… reminder: the scenario  in our last post, we set up a scenario that we* have both seen several times: a donor or large implementing agency (our focus, though we think our arguments applyContinue reading “have evidence, will… um, erm (2 of 2)”