{"id":14512,"date":"2020-01-22T15:48:51","date_gmt":"2020-01-22T20:48:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/researchimpact.ca\/?p=14512"},"modified":"2024-01-10T13:13:56","modified_gmt":"2024-01-10T18:13:56","slug":"outcomes-and-impacts-of-development-interventions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/researchimpact.ca\/fr\/club-de-lecture-en-mdc\/outcomes-and-impacts-of-development-interventions\/","title":{"rendered":"Outcomes and Impacts of Development Interventions"},"content":{"rendered":"

Belcher, B. and Palenberg, M. (2018) Outcomes and Impacts of Development Interventions: Toward Conceptual Clarity. Am J. Eval. 39(4) 478-495. https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.1177\/1098214018765698<\/a><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n

The terms \u201coutcome\u201d and \u201cimpact\u201d are ubiquitous in evaluation discourse. However, there are many competing definitions that lack clarity and consistency and sometimes represent fundamentally different meanings. This leads to profound confusion, undermines efforts to improve learning and accountability, and represents a challenge for the evaluation profession. This article investigates how the terms are defined and understood by different institutions and communities. It systematically investigates representative sets of definitions, analyzing them to identify 16 distinct defining elements. This framework is then used to compare definitions and assess their usefulness and limitations. Based on this assessment, the article proposes a remedy in three parts: applying good definition practice in future definition updates, differentiating causal perspectives and using appropriate causal language, and employing meaningful qualifiers when using the terms outcome and impact. The article draws on definitions used in international development, but its findings also apply to domestic public sector policies and interventions.<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

I am on record as being happy to leave definitions to others. I am busy enough doing the job of impact and rely on academics who have the mandate to pick apart the minutiae of definitions. I resist getting stuck in definitional dystopia. That\u2019s why I am pleased that Brian Belcher and Markus Palenberg care more than I do about definitions. Don\u2019t get me wrong. I appreciate the need for definitional clarity. I also appreciate that someone else will do the work.<\/p>\n

The paper does not give a \u201conce and for all\u201d definition of outcomes and impacts. Rather the paper reviews many definitions from multinational bodies such as UN agencies, OECD and some national bodies such as CIDA (not Global Affairs Canada). The paper identifies elements that are present in these definitions and make recommendations for the rest of us as we work with these terms.<\/p>\n

An important departure point for definitions are those that start from the \u201cintervention\u201d and map forward (the intervention perspective) and those that start from the observed change and map backwards (the system perspective). This is consistent with Sandra Nutley\u2019s work from Research Unit for Research Utilization<\/a> who wrote in Using Evidence (2007) about being able to forward track and backwards track impact assessments.<\/p>\n

One of the main ambiguities in the definitions of outcomes and impacts is the temporal nature and the causal nature. Must outputs precede outcomes and must there be outcomes before impacts? And must these happen sequentially in short, medium and long terms? There is not consensus among the definitions reviewed.<\/p>\n

One important distinction in the definitions from Results4Development is, In R4D, \u201cresults language needs to cover both the research and the development domain, and the terms outcome and impact have their own meaning in each<\/em>. Since research is not a core element in other international development schemes. For those of us working in research impact we need to consider both scholarly and broader (ie socioeconomic) impacts.<\/p>\n

The authors provide advice when considering your own definitions:<\/p>\n