Development Practice

Quick Links

• BiggerPictureVideo. (2013). Learning graphic facilitation: 7 elements by Bigger Picture [Video] (4:26 min.)
• From poverty to power: How active citizens and effective states can change the world, a blog maintained by Duncan Green, Oxfam GB.
• Participatory Methods (PMs), a resource collection extracted from the work of the Participation, Power and Social Change group at the Institute of Development Studies, UK.

In-Depth

• Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216-224. (StFX only)
• The barefoot guide 4: Exploring the real work of social change. (2015). [n.l.]: The Fourth Barefoot Guide Writer’s Collective.
• M & E Universe is a free resource developed by INTRAC to support development practitioners involved in monitoring and evaluation.

Case Studies

• Agwenjang, P., Landry, J., & Garbary, R. (2018). Engaging youth in municipal youth policy development (Santa, Northwest Cameroon).
• Akakpo, P. B., Landry, J., & Garbary, R. (2018). The Women’s Advisory Platform: Promoting gender-inclusive governance in Juaboso district (Ghana).
• Emiljanowicz, P. & Ibhawoh, B. (2017). Tradition, coalition building, and biological community protocols in land conflict disputes: The case of Tanchara, Ghana.
• Mathie, A., Alma, E., Lee, N., Peters, B., & von Lieres, B. (2017). Pathways towards political and economic agency: A synthesis of findings from five scoping studies (Innovations series no. 6). Antigonish, NS: Coady International Institute. (606K pdf)
• Pearson, L. & Crabtree, C. (2014). Case study 2: Enhancing resilience through cash transfers: Equity Bank and the Hunger Safety Net Programme in Northern Kenya. In Best practice case studies on private sector engagement in DRR: Undertaken as part of the FOREWARN Initiative (pp. 6-7). London: King’s College London. (2.38 Mb pdf)
• UN Women. (2013). Gender mainstreaming strategy in the Pro-Poor Horticulture Value Chain in Upper Egypt (SALASEL) MDG-F Programme.
• van Buuren, A., Landry, J., & Garbary, R. (2018). Seeking the meaningful inclusion of people with disabilities: The PATH process at L’Arche Antigonish (Nova Scotia).

Explore

Quick Links

• TEDGlobal. (2010). Eric Berlow: Simplifying complexity [Video]. (3:42 min.)
• Habits of a systems thinker, poster for download. (456K pdf)
• Systems Thinking and Practice: Diagramming, site contains course video links to different types of rich pictures hosted by the Open University, UK.
• Hutchinson, K. (2014). Systems thinking and evaluation [Video]. (5:11 min.)

In-Depth

• Gordijn, F., Helder, J., & Eernstman, N. (2012). Reflection methods: Tools to make learning more explicit: manual for facilitators and trainers. Wageningen: Centre for Development Innovation.
• Hinton, R. & Groves, L. (2004). The complexity of inclusive aid. In Groves & Hinton (Eds.), Inclusive aid: Changing power and relationships in international development (pp. 3-21). London: Earthscan. Library has hard copy: 338.91 G919i.

Plan

Quick Links

• Brown, A.-M. (2017, July 27). Different software for developing and visualising theories of change [Blog post]
• Center for Theory of Change, free resources available.
• Development Impact & You, practical tools to trigger and support social accountability and an electronic do-it-yourself kit for project management.
• International Labour Organization. (2017). Decent work and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development.
• INTRAC. (2012). Theory of change: What’s it all about? ONTRAC, no. 51.
• Sustainable Human. (2014). How wolves change rivers [Video]. (4:33 min.)

In-Depth

• Hummelbrunner, R. & Jones, H. (2013). A guide for planning and strategy development in the face of complexity (ODI Background note).
• International Budget Partnership (IBP)
• Miller, C. & Haylock, L. (2014). Capturing changes in women’s lives: The experiences of Oxfam Canada in applying feminist evaluation principles to monitoring and evaluation practice. Gender and Development, 22(2), 291-310. (StFX only)
• O’Donnell, M. (2016). Adaptive management: What it means for CSOs. London: Bond.
• Participatory Budgeting Project is a democratic process in which community members decide how to spend part of a public budget.
• Reisman, J., et al. (2004). Theory of change: A practical tool for action, results and learning. [n.l.]: Organizational Research Services. (370K pdf)
• Vogel, I. (2012). Review of the use of ‘Theory of Change’ in international development: Review report. London: DFID. (8.49 Mb pdf)

Act

Quick Links

• BetterEvaluation. (2013). Describe activities, outcomes, impacts and context. (595K pdf)
• Tamarack Institute, an institute for community engagement.
• Managing for Impact: Participatory, Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation is a portal managed by the Centre for Development Innovation (CDI), Wageningen University and Research Centre.

In-Depth

• Griffiths, M. (2006). Leadership and agile project management, ideas, observations.
• Jain, S. P. & Polman, W. (2003). A handbook for trainers on participatory local development: The Panchayati Raj model in India (2nd ed.). Bangkok: FAO.
• Shutt, C. (2016). Towards an alternative development management paradigm? Expertgruppen för biståndsanalys (EBA): Stockholm. (1.07 Mb pdf)

Reflect

Quick Links

• BetterEvaluation improves evaluation practice and theory by sharing information about methods, tools and approaches.
• Church, M. (2016). Doing things differently: Rethinking monitoring and evaluation to understand change. London: Saferworld.
• EvalPartners.org is a platform to share knowledge on monitoring and evaluation systems worldwide.
• Haddock, P. (2015). Monitoring and evaluating training: Challenges, opportunities and recommendations (Praxis paper 30). Oxford: INTRAC.
• IDRC Panasia. (2008). Jess Dart: Most significant change, Part 1 [Video]. (10:15 min.)
• Kramer, M. & Kania, J. (2011). Collective impact. Video, article and webinar available.
• Monitoring and Evaluation News focuses on monitoring and evaluation methods relevant to social development.
• Outcome Mapping, a learning community puts people at the center, defines outcomes as changes in behaviour, and helps measure contribution to complex change processes.
• Pelican Initiative, platform for evidence-based learning and communication for social change. Free registration required.

In-Depth

• Davies, R. & Dart, J. (2005). The ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) technique: A guide to its use. London: CARE International.
• Monitoring and evaluation planning series, published by INTRAC.
• Garbutt, A. (2013). Monitoring and evaluation: A guide for small and diaspora NGOs.
• Haugh, K. (2015, November 23). Outcome mapping: Considering complexity, relationships, and context in M&E for social change [Blog post].
• Rose, S. (2014). “More of an art than a science”: Challenges and solutions in monitoring and evaluating advocacy (M & E paper no. 8). Oxford, UK: INTRAC.
• Swaans, K., et al. (2013). A monitoring and evaluation framework to assess the performance of innovation platforms in the context of livestock value chains (Discussion paper no. 24). Nairobi: International Livestock Research Institute. (2.75 Mb pdf)

Exit Strategies

• Kloosterman, J., with Safier, C. (2014). Transformative leadership for women’s rights: An Oxfam guide: understanding how leadership can create sustainable change the promotes women’s rights and gender equality. Oxford: Oxfam.
• Lewis, S., et al. (2017). What’s it like to be on the receiving end of exit? A partner and country office view. London: Bond. (935K pdf)
• Morris, L. (2015). Working at the sharp end of programme closure: EveryChild’s responsible exit principles (Praxis note no. 70). [n.l.]: INTRAC. (577K pdf)

References

Quick Links

• Cane, P. M. (2005). CAPACITAR emergency response toolkit. (1.92 Mb pdf)
• Expandnet.net is a global network of public health professionals and scientists seeking to advance the practice and science of scaling up successful health programs.
• Hayman, R. (2012). Aid withdrawal, partnership and CSO sustainability in a time of global economic change: background paper. [n.l.]: INTRAC. (1.90 Mb pdf)

In-Depth

• Gardner, A., Greenblott, K., & Joubert, E. (2005). What we know about exit strategies: Practical guidance for developing exit strategies in the field: a product of the C-SAFE Regional Learning Spaces Initiative.
• Gender at Work. (2017). Gender at Work framework.
• Hartmann, A. & Linn, J. F. (2007). Scaling up: A path to effective development. Washington, DC: IFPRI. (112K pdf)
• Lewis, S. (2016). Developing a timeline for exit strategies: Experiences from an Action Learning Set with the British Red Cross, EveryChild, Oxfam GB, Sightsavers and WWF-UK. [n.l.]: INTRAC. (2.38 Mb pdf)