Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Ben Eyre
(University of East Anglia)
Mario Schmidt (Busara)
Ben Jones (University of East Anglia)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Paper panel
Short Abstract:
Evidence-based policy making is often presented as an antidote to the uncertainties of intervention in complex contexts. But different actors often have distinct aims. How do they come together? This panel looks at people and processes that make data, and their perspectives on what makes it "good."
Long Abstract:
Authoritative representation of impact is presented as essential to contemporary social and environmental interventions by governments and non-state actors. Evidence-based policy making is often presented as an antidote to the uncertainties in complex contexts. Its advocates harness multiple practices to evidence impact in order to justify their actions. Investors and philanthropists prioritise “actionable” data to inform decision making about effective intervention as well as cost-effectiveness. A data production and analysis infrastructure is essential to organising principles of sustainability and scale, and to managing them through a framework of risk. But distinct aims including scientific rigour, foundational knowledge, material reward, and capital allocation can impinge on one another. How do they come together? What do the multiple actors who make the data do? They include “local guides”, research officers and assistants, economics experts, NGOs, development agencies, investors, and politicians. This panel explores ideas about “good data” through attention to people and practices that make it work. Questions could include:
1) How and by whom is “good data” defined?
2) How are impact data produced, used, and experienced by different actors across contexts?
3) How does a focus on data quality differ, or on the contrary, help us make sense of concerns with metrics, quantification, and “audit cultures”?
4) How can we grasp these diffuse hierarchical relations that increasingly inform development practice?
5) What are there opportunities for (critical) engagement between ethnographers and those committed to evidence-based policy making?
We would also welcome other papers that explore impact data through other questions.