Evaluating the contribution of complex international research-for-development programmes to the sustainable development goals
Evaluating the contribution of complex international research-for-development programmes to the sustainable development goals
While evaluation of research-to-policy projects is a fundamental aspect of measuring the impact of new knowledge, limited studies have examined evaluation methods in such projects, as well as how the evaluation can generate learning to facilitate the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a systematic literature review and found that the most commonly used methods for SDG contribution evaluation were Analytical Hierarchy Process (40.4%), Fuzzy TOPSIS (13.2%) and ELECTRE and SPADE Methodology (3.5% each). Ranking analysis was undertaken to determine priorities among the six “Big Wins” as defined for the UKRI-GCRF Trade Hub Project, as a case, where the ranking was exercised by the project partners across the globe. Results revealed that “nature and social factors” was better considered in international trade agreements as the priority (36.4%) among others. Moreover, among the four “mechanisms” of the project, “knowledge, networks, and connectivity” was ranked as the top priority (56.9%), followed by “capacity building” (28.5%), “metrics, tools and models” (7.2%), and “improving the knowledge base” (4.6%). Mapping and evaluation revealed that the Big Wins of the Trade Hub contributed to ten out of the 17 SDGs. The most fulfilled goals were SDG 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production), SDG 15 (Life on Land), and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) in descending order. Furthermore, interaction analysis of the core SDGs revealed both synergy and tradeoff between different outputs. The research articles reviewed for this paper showed no gold standard framework for assessing international development projects against the SDGs. Further research should develop a tool to capture holistic and synergistic contributions of the target outcomes of projects to sustainable development.
AHP, Impact mapping, Interaction analysis, SDG evaluation, Sustainable development
380-401
Lu-Gonzales, Arlene
ae1f5758-8142-4ad4-9cd6-5f4c478b3f2e
Tsusaka, Takuji W.
7a4f89fb-d579-4059-b11f-d13536eb65bb
Szabo, Sylvia
01d6bb83-2775-4470-aa2b-b6afbf936187
Kadigi, Reuben M.J.
05d19aa3-5cff-4cb5-8405-e19491ded848
Foglietti, Camilla Blasi
e6e08b5e-d7fa-40b3-918e-63e6f8d9d441
Park, Seree
8dd5011f-6672-4774-9a83-6bea6ecd3c8b
Matthews, Zoe
ebaee878-8cb8-415f-8aa1-3af2c3856f55
April 2023
Lu-Gonzales, Arlene
ae1f5758-8142-4ad4-9cd6-5f4c478b3f2e
Tsusaka, Takuji W.
7a4f89fb-d579-4059-b11f-d13536eb65bb
Szabo, Sylvia
01d6bb83-2775-4470-aa2b-b6afbf936187
Kadigi, Reuben M.J.
05d19aa3-5cff-4cb5-8405-e19491ded848
Foglietti, Camilla Blasi
e6e08b5e-d7fa-40b3-918e-63e6f8d9d441
Park, Seree
8dd5011f-6672-4774-9a83-6bea6ecd3c8b
Matthews, Zoe
ebaee878-8cb8-415f-8aa1-3af2c3856f55
Lu-Gonzales, Arlene, Tsusaka, Takuji W., Szabo, Sylvia, Kadigi, Reuben M.J., Foglietti, Camilla Blasi, Park, Seree and Matthews, Zoe
(2023)
Evaluating the contribution of complex international research-for-development programmes to the sustainable development goals.
European Journal of Development Research, 35 (2), .
(doi:10.1057/s41287-022-00573-7).
Abstract
While evaluation of research-to-policy projects is a fundamental aspect of measuring the impact of new knowledge, limited studies have examined evaluation methods in such projects, as well as how the evaluation can generate learning to facilitate the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a systematic literature review and found that the most commonly used methods for SDG contribution evaluation were Analytical Hierarchy Process (40.4%), Fuzzy TOPSIS (13.2%) and ELECTRE and SPADE Methodology (3.5% each). Ranking analysis was undertaken to determine priorities among the six “Big Wins” as defined for the UKRI-GCRF Trade Hub Project, as a case, where the ranking was exercised by the project partners across the globe. Results revealed that “nature and social factors” was better considered in international trade agreements as the priority (36.4%) among others. Moreover, among the four “mechanisms” of the project, “knowledge, networks, and connectivity” was ranked as the top priority (56.9%), followed by “capacity building” (28.5%), “metrics, tools and models” (7.2%), and “improving the knowledge base” (4.6%). Mapping and evaluation revealed that the Big Wins of the Trade Hub contributed to ten out of the 17 SDGs. The most fulfilled goals were SDG 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production), SDG 15 (Life on Land), and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) in descending order. Furthermore, interaction analysis of the core SDGs revealed both synergy and tradeoff between different outputs. The research articles reviewed for this paper showed no gold standard framework for assessing international development projects against the SDGs. Further research should develop a tool to capture holistic and synergistic contributions of the target outcomes of projects to sustainable development.
Text
s41287-022-00573-7
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 14 November 2022
e-pub ahead of print date: 6 January 2023
Published date: April 2023
Additional Information:
Funding Information:
Neil Burgess and Julia Wentworth provided useful comments. The paper is supported by the UK Research and Innovation’s Global Challenges Research Fund (UKRI GCRF) through the Trade, Development and the Environment Hub project (Project No. ES/S008160/1), led by the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).
Keywords:
AHP, Impact mapping, Interaction analysis, SDG evaluation, Sustainable development
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 474550
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/474550
ISSN: 0957-8811
PURE UUID: 5c9b41db-9ee5-4f3b-9064-497b67f28d5f
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 24 Feb 2023 17:38
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 02:41
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Arlene Lu-Gonzales
Author:
Takuji W. Tsusaka
Author:
Sylvia Szabo
Author:
Reuben M.J. Kadigi
Author:
Camilla Blasi Foglietti
Author:
Seree Park
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics