Veranstaltungsprogramm

Introduction: The aim of the study was to assess the extent to which Zimbabwe and Botswana’s national M&E systems are institutionalized. This was done through answering the following research questions: 1) What is currently known about the development of national M&E systems in Botswana and Zimbabwe; 2) What are the existing theories and frameworks that could be applied to investigate the development and institutionalisation of national M&E systems; 3) Where are the countries at in terms of the institutionalisation of their national M&E system.
Methods: These research questions were addressed by conducting a study design enshrined within the revised atlas framework of Furubo, Rist and Sandahl (2002) a framework that provide a systematic overview of M&E systems in various parts of the world. I adopted the atlas (with high levels of confidence in terms of its reliability and validity) as the framework of choice to implement the study. An exploratory concurrent nested mixed method (qualitative and quantitative) was employed in this study with both primary and secondary data collected and analyzed.
Results: The overall score against the revised Atlas for Botswana was 40% and Zimbabwe 53% indicating a rather average level of institutionalisation for both countries. The main driver emerged to be public sector reforms adopted and implemented by the two countries post-independence. Major stakeholders providing technical and financial support to the development and institutionalisation process were NGOs. Though for Zimbabwe the development was mainly driven by external pressure from the donors and other multilateral organizations. For Botswana the pressure was internal, and the government played a greater role in terms of providing the required financial support for the system.
Conclusion and recommendation: The main findings of the study show that both countries have made progress in institutionalizing their national M&E systems. However, more is yet to be realized, and it requires deliberate efforts to address all those important institutional constraints highlighted in this study. The key recommendation for Botswana is that the country should develop a national M&E policy whilst for Zimbabwe is that it should create a more democratic system that promote generation and utilization of M&E information at all levels. It is recommended that more research of similar nature be done as more work is still needed to contribute to a better understanding of the African M&E landscape.

Die Evaluierung von öffentlichen Politiken und Entwicklungsprogrammen wird zunehmend als wichtiges Instrument zur Verbesserung der Regierungsführung und der Wirksamkeit von Maßnahmen in Afrika anerkannt. Die Institutionalisierung von Evaluation, d.h. ihre Integration in staatliche Systeme und Prozesse, stellt für die Länder des frankophonen Afrikas eine große Herausforderung dar. Der vorliegende Beitrag befasst sich mit der Institutionalisierung von Evaluation im frankophonen Westafrika mit besonderem Fokus auf den öffentlichen Sektor. Im Zentrum der Analyse stehen folgende Fragen: Wie ist der aktuelle Stand der Institutionalisierung von Evaluation im frankophonen Westafrika? Welche Rolle spielt die Institutionalisierung von Evaluation für Good Governance in den frankophonen Ländern Westafrikas? Welche Faktoren fördern oder behindern diesen Prozess? Welche Zukunftsperspektiven hat die Institutionalisierung von Evaluation in Afrika? Um alle Aspekte dieser Fragen zu behandeln und vertiefte Antworten zu erhalten, stützt sich der Beitrag auf eine systematische Literaturrecherche und -analyse. Der Beitrag hat somit den Charakter einer Deskstudie. Die Analyse zeigt, dass die Evaluation öffentlicher Politiken zu einem wichtigen Pfeiler transparenter und effizienter Governance geworden ist. Im frankophonen Westafrika schreitet die Institutionalisierung der Evaluation voran, angetrieben von globalen Agenden wie den Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) und der Agenda 2063 der Afrikanischen Union. Die Herausforderungen sind jedoch groß. Mehr Autonomie, ein stärkerer rechtlicher und institutioneller Rahmen, eine bessere Finanzierung und eine stärkere Einbindung lokaler Akteure sind notwendig. Für die Zukunft ist die Entwicklung einer sogenannten afrikaspezifischen Evaluierung vielversprechend, um die Evaluierungspraxis an die Besonderheiten des Kontinents anzupassen. Es bedarf jedoch weiterer Anstrengungen, um die verbleibenden Herausforderungen zu bewältigen und die Autonomie der afrikanischen Evaluierungssysteme zu stärken.

In the context of Russia's full-scale war against Ukraine, international support for recovery and reconstruction in Ukraine has increased significantly. Since June 2022, Ukraine has official EU candidate status. For both Ukrainian decision-makers and international partners, the reconstruction and recovery process offers a valuable opportunity to understand and strengthen the national evaluation system and its capacities. Doing so will support strategic evidence-based policymaking, enhance accountability and learning, and contribute to good governance and effective donor coordination. Assessing the current evaluation system is also essential for strengthening the resilience of the Ukrainian state and supporting the success of the EU enlargement process.

The paper provides a theoretical contribution to enhance understanding of the factors for successfully establishing and strengthening evaluation systems in conflict-affected states. To date, research has addressed the importance of national evaluation systems for evidence-based policymaking, learning and accountability in conflict-affected states only to a limited extent. The theoretical considerations are built on lessons learned from civilian donor engagement in fragile and conflict-affected states and previous EU enlargement processes. The paper hypothesizes that in these environments, both internal factors, encompassing institutional and political conditions, methodological challenges and ethical considerations, and external factors, particularly the influence of the international donor community, are pivotal.

The empirical work builds on the joint efforts of DEval and members of the Ukrainian Evaluation Association in conducting a detailed study of Ukraine’s evaluation system and capacities. It follows a descriptive-analytical approach that integrates both primary and secondary data to enable a comprehensive case study analysis.The findings illustrate the negative impact of war on existing internal factors, such as institutional and political conditions, whilst simultaneously amplifying methodological and ethical barriers to data generation and analysis. Considering these dynamics, the institutionalization and professionalization of M&E are determined by the interplay of external donor engagement, which serves as the primary driving force to strengthen such systems, and enabling internal factors, primarily related to administrative capacity and political will.