¿QUÉ FUNCIONA, PARA QUIÉN, EN QUÉ ASPECTOS, HASTA QUÉ PUNTO, EN QUÉ CONTEXTO Y CÓMO? UNA INTRODUCCIÓN A LA EVALUACIÓN REALISTA Y SUS MÉTODOS

Juan, Parra (2017): ¿QUÉ FUNCIONA, PARA QUIÉN, EN QUÉ ASPECTOS, HASTA QUÉ PUNTO, EN QUÉ CONTEXTO Y CÓMO? UNA INTRODUCCIÓN A LA EVALUACIÓN REALISTA Y SUS MÉTODOS.

Abstract

Este artículo introduce la Evaluación Realista (ER) para el análisis de políticos públicas. La ER encuentra justificación en las limitaciones de prácticas dominantes, como las técnicas de evaluación de impacto, para ofrecer explicaciones sobre el porqué una intervención o programa tuvo (o no) resultado. La noción de cambio o transformación de la ER se centra en el estudio contextual de la agencia humana, o la forma en que individuos y colectividades actúan frente a iniciativas públicas o privadas orientadas a resolver problemáticas sociales. El texto se adentra en propuestas metodológicos para el despliegue de una ER en la práctica, tarea que implicará un trabajo interdisciplinario para refinar diferentes teorías sobre qué funciona, para quién, en qué aspectos, hasta qué punto, en qué contexto y cómo. Su adherencia al realismo científico hace de la ER una alternativa democrática, pero rigurosa, para contribuir en la generación de diseños más pertinentes de políticas públicas.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• English Title: WHAT WORKS, FOR WHOM, IN WHAT RESPECTS, TO WHAT EXTENT, IN WHAT CONTEXTS, AND HOW? AN INTRODUCTION TO REALIST EVALUATION AND ITS METHODS
• Language: Spanish
• Keywords: Evaluación Realista, Políticas Públicas, Teoría del cambio del programa, Agencia humana
• Subjects: B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B4 - Economic Methodology > B40 - General; Y - Miscellaneous Categories > Y2 - Introductory Material > Y20 - Introductory Material; Y - Miscellaneous Categories > Y8 - Related Disciplines > Y80 - Related Disciplines; Z - Other Special Topics > Z1 - Cultural Economics ; Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology > Z18 - Public Policy

References

Anderson, R y Hardwick, R (2016), Realism and resources: Towards more explanatory economic evaluation, Evaluation, 22(3), 323–341.

Bhaskar, R (1998). The possibility of naturalism. A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences. Londrés y Nueva York: Routledge.

Blamey, A y Mackenzie, M (2007), Theories of change and realistic evaluation: peas in a pod or apples and oranges?, Evaluation, 13(4), 439-455.

Bozzoli, C, Brück T y Wald, N (2013), Evaluating programmes in conflict-affected areas. En P Justino, T Brück & P Verwimp, eds. A Micro-Level Perspective on the Dynamics of Conflict, Violence, and Development (pp. 249-268), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bunge, M (2011), Knowledge: Genuine and Bogus, Science & Education, 20(5), 411–438. Bush, K y Duggan, C (2013), Evaluation in Conflict Zones: Methodological and Ethical Challenges, Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, 8(2), 5-25.

Deaton, A. (2010), Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development, Journal of Economic Literature, 48(Junio), 424-455.

Emmel, N (2013), Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research, Los Angeles, Londres, Nueva Delhi, Singapur, Washington DC: SAGE.

Gertler, P, Sebastian Martinez, Patrick Premand, Laura B Rawlings & Christel M J Vermeersch (2011), Evaluación de impacto en la práctica, Washington DC: The World Bank.

Glewwe, P, Hanushek, E, Humpage, S & Ravina, R (2013), School resources and educational outcomes in developing countries: A review of the literature from 1990 to 2010, En P. Glewwe , Education Policy in Developing Countries, eds. (págs. 13-64), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Guba, E y Lincoln, S (1989), Fourth Generation Evaluation, Newbury Park, Londres, Nueva Delhi: SAGE Publications.

Hesse-Biber, S (2013), Thinking Outside the Randomized Controlled Trials Experimental Box: Strategies for Enhancing Credibility and Social Justice, New Directions for Evaluation(138), 49–60.

Horrocks, I y Budd, L (2015), Into the void: A realist evaluation of the eGovernment for You (EGOV4U) project, Evaluation, 2(1), 47–64.

Jackson, S & Kolla, G (2012), A New Realistic Evaluation, American Journal of Evaluation, 33(3), 339-349. Manzano, A (2011), A realistic evaluation of fines for hospital discharges: Incorporating the history of programme evaluations in the analysis, Evaluation, 17(1), 21–36.

Manzano, A (2016), The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation, Evaluation, 22(3), 342-360.

Milani, C (2009), Evidence-based policy research: critical review of some international programmes on relationships between social science research and policy-making. Paris: United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) Policy Papers No 18.

Montoya-Vargas, J (2014). The Field of Curriculum Studies in Colombia, En W. Pinar, ed. International Handbook of Curriculum Research Vol 2 (pp. 134-150), New York: Routledge.

Parada, J (2007), Sociedad y evaluación de programas sociales en el realismo crítico: una revisión crítica, Investigación y Desarrollo, 15(1), 170-207.

Parra, JD (2013), Preferencias endógenas, prosocialidad y políticas públicas, Divergencia, 15, 64-71.

Parra, JD (2015), The Paradigm of Critical Realism and Involving Educators in Policy Debates, Gist: Education and Learning Research Journal, (10), 149-171.

Parra, JD (2016), Realismo crítico: una alternativa en el análisis social, Sociedad y Economía(31), 215-238.

Parra, JD (2017), Critical realism and school effectiveness research in Colombia: The difference it should make, The British Journal of Sociology of Education, En imprenta.

Patomäki, H (2003), A Critical Realist Approach to Global Political Economy En J. Cruickshank, ed. Critical Realism: The Difference It Makes (pp. 197-220), Londres: Routledge.

Pawson, R (1996), Theorizing the Interview, The British Journal of Sociology, 47(2), 295-314.

Pawson, R (2003), Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory, Evaluation, 9(4), 471–490.

Pawson, R (2006). Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective, Londres: Sage.

Pawson, R (2013). The Science of Evaluation: A Realist Manifesto, Londres: Sage.

Pawson, R & Manzano, A (2012) A realist diagnostic workshop, Evaluation, 18(2), 176-191.

Pawson, R & Tilley, N (1997), Realistic Evaluation, London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: SAGE Publication.

Pawson, R & Tilley, N (2001), Realistic Evaluation Bloodlines, American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 317-324.

Pawson, R, Wong, G y Owen, L (2011a), Known knowns, known unknowns, unknown unknowns: The predicament of evidence-based policy, American Journal of Evaluation, 32(4), 518-546.

Pawson, R, Wong, G y Owen, L (2011b), Myths, facts and conditional truths: What is the evidence on the risks associated with smoking in cars carrying children?, CMAJ, 183(10), E680-E684.

Porpora, D (2015), Reconstructing sociology. The Critical Realist Approach, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Porter, S (2015), The uncritical realism of realist evaluation, Evaluation, 21(1), 65–82.

Sayer, A (2000), Realism and Social Science, Londres, Thousand Oaks y Nueva Delhi: SAGE Publications.

Shadish, W, Cook, T y Campbell, D (2002), Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Generalised Causal Inference, Boston y Nueva York: Houghton Mifflin.

Smith, C y Elger, T (2014), Critical Realism and Interviewing Subjects. En Paul Edwards, J O'Mahoney, & S Vincent, eds. Studying Organizations Using Critical Realism. A Practical Guide (pp. 109-131), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sridharan, S y Nakaima A (2011), Ten steps to making evaluation matter, Evaluation and Program Planning, 34(2), 135-146.

Stake, R (2004), Sandards-Based & Responsive Evaluation, Thousand Oaks, Londres y Nueva Delhi: Sage Publications.

Starr, M (2014), Qualitative and mixed-methods research in economics: Surprising growth, promising future, Journal of Economic Surveys, 28(2), 238–264.

Van Belle, S, Wong, G, Westhorp, G, Pearson, M, Emmel, N, Manzano, A y Marchal B (2016), Can realist randomised controlled trials be genuinely realist?, Trials, 17(1), 2-6.

Vygotsky, L (1997), Interaction between learning and development, En M. Gauvain, & M. Cole, eds. Readings on the development of children (pp. 29-36). Nueva York: W.H. Freeman and Company. Westhorp, G (2013), Developing complexity-consistent theory in a realist evaluation, Evaluation, 19(4), 364–382.

Wong, G y Papoutsi C (2016), Notas de clase (14-18 de Octubre): Realist Reviews and Realist Evaluation, Oxford: Oxford University

Wong, G, Westhorp, G, Manzano, A, Greenhalgh, J, Jagosh, J y Greenhalgh, T (2016), RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations, BMC Medicine, 14(96), 1-18.