Author Description

Evaluation has become a key tool for assessing the performance of international organizations (IOs), to foster learning and to demonstrate accountability. Within the United Nations (UN) system, thousands of evaluators and consultants produce hundreds of evaluation reports worth millions of dollars every year. But does evaluation really deliver on its promise of objective evidence and functional use? By unravelling the internal machinery of IO evaluation systems, this book challenges the conventional understanding of evaluation as a value-free activity. It shows how a seemingly neutral technocratic tool can serve as an instrument for power in global governance. The book demonstrates and explains how deeply politics are entrenched in the interests of evaluation stakeholders, the control and design of IO evaluation systems, and to a lesser extent also in the content of evaluation reports. The analysis draws on 120 research interviews with evaluators, member state representatives, and IO secretariat officials as well as on text analysis of over 200 evaluation reports. 21 UN system organizations are investigated, including detailed case studies for the ILO, IMF, UNDP, UN Women, IOM, UNHCR, FAO, WHO, and UNESCO. Shedding light on the (in-)effectiveness of evidence-based policymaking, the authors propose options how to better reconcile the observed evaluation politics with the need to gather reliable evidence that is used for improving the functioning of the United Nations. The answer to evaluation politics is not to abandon evaluation or isolate it from the stakeholders but to acknowledge surrounding political interests and design evaluation systems accordingly.