Transforming the MEL system for system transformation
Panel Discussion | Online
-
Organized by:
KIT institute
- In partnership with: International Institute of Social Studies
About the Event
Many international development programmes aim for a more sustainable and inclusive world by taking a system transformation approach. Achieving this transformation is, however, not a simple task. Many of these programmes are characterized by a so-called “double complexity”: a rather complex intervention, set in a complex and uncertain environment. These programs operate for example in a variety of contexts at different levels, through multiple combined intervention logics, involving a multiplicity of partners from different sectors with differing backgrounds and values (Faling et al., 2023).
To match their transformative ambitions, such programmes require a different way of working, characterized by flexibility in programming, adaptive management, and with a central role for trial-and-error and learning by doing. This shift drastically changes the demands placed on MEL systems. To stay relevant and effective, MEL systems must evolve alongside the programs they seek to support (Patton, 2023). To cite the gLOCAL concept note, MEL systems must be: “embracing innovative, context-responsive methods that deliver timely, actionable insights to influence policies, behavior, and institutional reforms.”
We interpret MEL-systems broadly as the constellation of actors, relations, and structures through which the MEL-landscape is organized, including donors and their policies, programme management and their practices, as well as evaluators. While there is widespread recognition that MEL systems need to change, critical questions remain, including: what are the requirements MEL-systems should meet? What paradigm shifts are needed to arrive at effective MEL systems for system transformation? What roles and responsibilities should different MEL stakeholders take on? And what immediate actions can donors, program managers, MEL specialists, and evaluators take to make MEL systems more responsive to system change ambitions?
This online panel discussion starts from the recognition that transforming MEL-systems is essential for system transformation. This panel reflects from various angles on the transformations required to equip the Dutch MEL-system to contribute to system transformation, while considering its relevance beyond the Dutch context.
To match their transformative ambitions, such programmes require a different way of working, characterized by flexibility in programming, adaptive management, and with a central role for trial-and-error and learning by doing. This shift drastically changes the demands placed on MEL systems. To stay relevant and effective, MEL systems must evolve alongside the programs they seek to support (Patton, 2023). To cite the gLOCAL concept note, MEL systems must be: “embracing innovative, context-responsive methods that deliver timely, actionable insights to influence policies, behavior, and institutional reforms.”
We interpret MEL-systems broadly as the constellation of actors, relations, and structures through which the MEL-landscape is organized, including donors and their policies, programme management and their practices, as well as evaluators. While there is widespread recognition that MEL systems need to change, critical questions remain, including: what are the requirements MEL-systems should meet? What paradigm shifts are needed to arrive at effective MEL systems for system transformation? What roles and responsibilities should different MEL stakeholders take on? And what immediate actions can donors, program managers, MEL specialists, and evaluators take to make MEL systems more responsive to system change ambitions?
This online panel discussion starts from the recognition that transforming MEL-systems is essential for system transformation. This panel reflects from various angles on the transformations required to equip the Dutch MEL-system to contribute to system transformation, while considering its relevance beyond the Dutch context.
Speakers
| Name | Title | Biography |
|---|---|---|
| Rob Kuijpers | PhD | Rob Kuijpers is a development economist at KIT Institute with more than ten years’ experience (since 2011) in policy and program evaluation, impact assessment, applied research, and policy advice in the realm of agricultural development, value chain innovations, and food and nutrition security. Since he joined KIT Royal Tropical Institute in 2019 he has broadened his expertise by working on topics such as international responsible conduct, integrated landscape approaches, and nature conservation. In his research and advisory activities he aims to contribute to evidence-based policies by bridging the gap between rigorous scientific insights and pragmatic decision making. This requires translating complex research evidence into actionable insights for decision makers. To generate new evidence, he applies both qualitative research methods (such as contribution analyses) and quantitative methods (such as quasi-experimental designs). He has worked in/on Africa (Egypt, Ethiopia, Liberia, Mozambique, Rwanda, South-Africa, Tanzania, Uganda), Asia (Bangladesh, Indonesia), Latin America (Brazil), and the Caribbean. He has done research on a wide range of value chains and commodities, including aquaculture, dairy, cocoa, cereals (rice, wheat, barley, maize), palm oil, poultry, horticulture, soy, beans, and plantains (matooke). |
| Marijn Faling | PhD | Marijn is Assistant Professor at the International Institute of Social Studies (ISS), Erasmus University Rotterdam. Her research focuses on collaborative change processes to address poverty, climate change, and food insecurity. She likes to undertake multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary research, and uses action-oriented research approaches where possible. Marijn's interests can be classified along three lines. The first line focuses on strategies by different actors - public, private, civil society - to influence agriculture and climate change policies at various levels. The second line revolves around private-sector engagement in development, with a focus on inclusive business initiatives and value chain partnerships, and the processes and dynamics influencing inclusive development objectives and results. The third research line is about monitoring and evaluation (M&E), with a particular focus on complex multi-actor collaborations for development, challenges around assessing systems changes and monitoring and evaluating adaptive approaches. |
| Peter van der Knaap | PhD | Peter van der Knaap has been director of IOB since September 2021. Before that, he was director-manager of SWOV, the national Institute for Road Safety Research and director of Efficiency Research at the Netherlands Court of Audit. He previously held various positions at the Ministry of Finance, including head of Policy Evaluation at DG National Budget. Van der Knaap is a public administration expert: his PhD research focused on decision-making in the European Union. Central to his work is the motto that research and policy evaluation must contribute to a 'learning government' and to the success of measures. |
| Victoria Graham | Victoria is Solidaridad's global lead on monitoring and evaluation. She has more than 15 years’ experience managing projects with a focus on strategic planning, monitoring, evaluation and learning in international development with a focus on sustainable agri-supply chains. | |
| Renate Kersten (tentative) | Renate is senior Policy Advisor Trade for Development at the Sustainable Economic Development Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Netherlands. |
Moderators
| Name | Title | Biography |
|---|---|---|
| Greetje Schouten | Senior advisor at KIT institute | Greetje Schouten is a senior advisor at KIT institute with 15 years of experience in academic and applied research, monitoring and evaluation of complex systems, and advisory work in the areas of sustainable and inclusive transformations of agri-food chains. She has worked extensively on projects that involve collaborations between the private sector, NGOs, and/or state actors. Greetje uses a range of qualitative methodologies that include comparative configurational methodologies (e.g. QCA), systematic literature reviewing, contribution analysis, and process-tracing. Prior to joining KIT Institute she was a senior research fellow at the Partnership Resource Centre of Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. She holds a PhD in Environmental Governance from the Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development at Utrecht University. |