Monitoring and evaluating advocacy
Lessons from Oxfam GB's Climate Change campaign
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4964744 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Simon Starling (Oxfam, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2010 |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 277-286 |
| Publication date | 2010-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Development in Practice (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0961-4524 • E-ISSN: 1364-9213 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/09614520903564215 |
| OpenAlex | W2069283509 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 6 |
This article examines Oxfam GB's learning from its attempts to improve monitoring and evaluation (M&E) processes within a global advocacy campaign. It outlines the Climate Change campaign team's practical experience of piloting different approaches to M&E, and the lessons emerging from the process. The experience suggests that while some ‘traditional’ elements of M&E are helpful in advocacy work, a greater focus on light, real-time monitoring systems is necessary. The findings highlight the organisational as well as methodological challenges of integrating M&E into advocacy campaigns: without a culture that rewards reflection and learning, improvements in staff capacities or data-collection systems will not be sustained. Indeed, the process of improving M&E practice mirrors that of an advocacy campaign itself, requiring analysis of power relations, opportunities, and constraints; monitoring of progress; and adapting plans on the basis of on-going learning. Finally, the article suggests possible ways forward, based on experience
Data collection · Monitoring and evaluation · Political science · Public relations · Social science · Sociology · Computer Science · Disaster Management and Resilience · Engineering · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Public Policy and Administration Research
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,25 |
| Citation span | 2014 - 2019 (6) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |