Publications

Development cooperation is one of the few policy fields where evaluation is deeply institutionalised as an important component in the policy cycle. Independence, utility and credibility are overarching principles that guide both evaluation criteria as well as processes. Still, a challenge exists in how to adequately strengthen the role of partner countries in the evaluation of development cooperation. This policy brief suggests a framework for analysis, consisting of four interdependent dimensions which should be carefully considered: a partner dimension, a process dimension, an intensity dimension and a capacity dimension. Using such a framework allows to develop tailor-made reforms for diferent types of evaluations as well as organisations instead of proclaiming one overarching normative blueprint.

• Faust, J. (2024), Strengthening the Role of Partner Countries in Evaluating Development Cooperation: A Framework for Analysis, DEval Policy Brief 2/2024, German Institute for Development Evaluation (DEval), Bonn.

The right to sexual and reproductive well-being forms a tenet of human rights, yet challenges to achieving equitable sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) persist, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs). Some of these challenges are starkly reflected in high rates of gender-based violence (GBV), preventable maternal deaths during labor and childbirth, unsafe abortions, and child marriage. SRHR programs and policies can be powerful catalysts to empower individuals, address harmful gender norms, and improve service availability and quality. However, the evidence base on the effects of such SRHR interventions in L&MICs remains fragmented by topic or population. A comprehensive mapping of the available evidence is a critical step towards consolidating knowledge of programs that aim to strengthen SRHR in L&MICs. This evidence gap map includes over 1,000 studies on SRHR programs across the world and includes studies for people in challenging situations such as conflict or experiencing vulnerability in exercising rights or availing services.

• Khan L., T. Kozakiewicz, M. Bhattacharyya, T. Azim, M. Schmidt, T. Polak, B. Snilstveit, S. Shisler (2024). Sexual and reproductive health and rights in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence gap map, 3ie Evidence Gap Map Report 31. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).

The right to sexual and reproductive well-being is a human right, yet challenges to achieving sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) persist, especially in low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs). SRHR policies and programs can empower individuals, address harmful gender norms and promote universal access to services. However, the evidence base on the effects of programs in L&MICs is fragmented by topic or population. A comprehensive mapping of the evidence is a critical step towards consolidating knowledge of programs that aim to strengthen SRHR in L&MICs. The German Institute for Development Evaluation, with support from the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development and additional funding from Co-Impact, commissioned the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) to produce an evidence gap map (EGM) for SRHR in L&MICs. The map visually organizes SRHR studies to highlight evidence gaps and inform future research.

• Khan L., T. Kozakiewicz, M. Bhattacharyya, T. Azim, M. Schmidt, T. Polak, B. Snilstveit, S. Shisler (2024). Sexual and reproductive health and rights in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence gap map, 3ie Evidence Gap Map Report 31. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).

Evidence on the effectiveness of climate change adaptation interventions in low- and middle-income countries has been rapidly growing in recent years, particularly in the agricultural and coastal sectors. Here we address the question of whether results are consistent across intervention types, and risk reduction versus development-related outcomes using a systematic review of 363 empirical observations published in the scientific literature. 

• Villamayor-Tomas, S., A. Bisaro, K. Moull, A. Albizua, I. Mank, J. Hinkel, G. Leppert, M. Noltze (2024). Developing countries can adapt to climate change effectively using nature-based solutions. Commun Earth Environ 5, 214

This policy brief presents the findings of an Evidence Gap Map (EGM) that depicts the available evidence on cash transfers and cash plus programs across a wide range of outcomes in low- and middle-income countries. The EGM facilitates evidence-informed decision-making in social protection by enabling easy access to the existing rigorous evidence. It also seeks to address the current lack of a systematic mapping of the evidence on the impact of cash transfers. This policy brief pinpoints critical areas and populations for which limited or no evidence exists, and hence suggests potential avenues for closing those knowledge gaps.

• Pasha, A., V. Urueña, S. Knoll, K. Wolf, C. De Swardt, M. Featherston-Lardeux and D. Hörner (2024), Evidence Gap Map: Social Protection. Cash Transfers and Cash Plus Programs in Low-and Middle-Income Countries: Policy Brief, Center for Evaluation and Development (C4ED) and German Institute for Development Evaluation (DEval), Bonn.

In recent years, the body of evidence on the effects of cash transfers and cash plus interventions has increased significantly, particularly for low- and middle-income countries. The range of studied outcomes spans diverse fields such as health, education, consumption, and women's empowerment. As more studies and information become available, the need for synthesis and evidence mapping becomes ever greater. This evidence gap map aims to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making by enabling easy access to the existing rigorous evidence on cash transfers and cash plus programs in low- and middle-income countries. It includes a total of 709 impact evaluations and 33 systematic reviews and provides a visual and interactive representation of these studies in a framework of cash transfer types and a broad range of outcomes. Moreover, it pinpoints critical areas with limited or no evidence, highlighting areas in which more impact evaluations or syntheses are needed.

• Pasha, A., V. Urueña, S. Knoll, K. Wolf, C. De Swardt, M. Featherston-Lardeux and D. Hörner (2023), Cash Transfers and Cash Plus Programs in Low-and Middle-Income Countries: Evidence Gap Map, Center for Evaluation and Development (C4ED) and German Institute for Development Evaluation (DEval), Bonn.