Concern-focused evaluation for ambiguous and conflicting policies: An approach from the environmental field

American Journal of Evaluation

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 180-198

  Mermet, Laurent ^a   Billé, Raphaël ^b   Leroy, Maya ^a  

^a AGROPARISTECH   (France)

^b SCIENCES PO   (France)

Author keywords

Environmental policy; Integrated policy; Strategic evaluation; Wetland policy

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952867359     PISSN: 10982140     EISSN: 15570878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1098214010366047     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abma, T.A., & Stake, R.E. (2001). Stake's responsive evaluation: Core Ideas and evolution. New Directions for Evaluation, 92, 7-21.
2. Arts, B., & Leroy, P. (Eds.). (2006). Institutional dynamics in environmental governance (environment & policy). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
3. Billé, R. (2007). A dual-level framework for evaluating integrated coastal management beyond labels. Ocean & Coastal Management, 50, 796-807.
4. CIME. (1994). Les Zones Humides, Rapport de l'Instance d'Evaluation. Paris, France: La documentation française.
5. Collectif ComMod. (2005). La modélisation comme outil d'accompagnement. Natures, Sciences, Sociétés, 13, 165-168.
6. Cousins, J.B., & Earl, L.M. (1992). The case for participatory evaluation. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 14, 397-418.
7. Crabbé, A., & Leroy, P. (2008). The handbook of environmental policy evaluation. London, UK: Earthscan.
8. Fetterman, D., & Wandersman, A. (2007). Empowerment evaluation: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. American Journal of Evaluation, 28, 179-198.
9. Fischer, T.B. (2007). The theory and practice of strategic environmental assessment. Towards a more systematic approach. London, UK: Earthscan.
10. Greene, J.C., & Abma, T.A. (2001). Editors' note to the issue on responsive evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 92, 1-5.
11. Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12. Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
13. Holling, C.S. (1978). Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Chichester, UK: John Wiley, IIASA.
14. House, E.R., & Howe, K.R. (1998). Deliberative democratic evaluation in practice. Boulder: University of Colorado.
15. Knaap, G. J., & Kim, T. J. (Eds.). (1998). Environmental evaluation, a primer. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
16. Lafferty, W.M., & Hovden, E. (2003). Environmental policy integration: Towards an analytical framework. Enviromental Politics, 12, 1-22.
17. Lascoumes, P., & Setbon, M. (1996). L'évaluation pluraliste des politiques publiques-enjeux, pratiques, produits. Paris, France: G.A.P.P.-CNRS/Commissariat Général du Plan.
18. Lehtonen, M. (2006). Deliberative democracy, participation, and OECD peer reviews of environmental policies. American Journal of Evaluation, 27, 185-200.
19. Leroy, M. (2006). Gestion stratégique des écosystèmes du fleuve Sénégal: Action et inaction publiques internationales. Paris, France: L'Harmattan.
20. Manin, B. (1987). On legitimacy and political deliberation. Political Theory, 15, 338-368.
21. Mermet, L. (1996). Les études d'évaluation entre stratégie et méthodologie-l'exemple des politiques publiques en matière de zones humides. Gérer et Comprendre, 46, 55-64.
22. Mermet, L., & Benhammou, F. (2005). Assurer l'inaction dans un monde familier: la fabrication stratégique de l'incertitude. Ecologie et politique, 31, 121-136.
23. Mermet, L., Billé, R., Leroy, M., Narcy, J.B., & Poux, X. (2005). L'analyse stratégique de la gestion environnementale: un cadre théorique pour penser l'efficacité en matière d'environnement. Natures, Sciences, Sociétés, 13, 127-137.
24. Mermet, L., Dubien, I., Emerit, A., & Laurans, Y. (2004). Les porteurs de projets face à leurs opposants: Six critères pour évaluer la concertation en aménagement. Politiques et Management Public, 22, 1-22.
25. Mickwitz, P. (2003). A framework for evaluating environmental policy instruments: Context and key concepts. Evaluation, 9, 415-436.
26. Miller, R.L., & Campbell, R. (2006). Taking stock of empowerment evaluation-An empirical review. American Journal of Evaluation, 27, 296-319.
27. Mintzberg, H. (1978). The structuring of organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
28. Mitsch, W.J., & Gosselink, J.G. (2007). Wetlands. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
29. Monnier, E. (1992). Evaluation de l'action des pouvoirs publics. Paris, France: Economica.
30. Patton, M.Q. (1986). Utilization-focused evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
31. Patton, M.Q. (1997). Toward distinguishing empowerment evaluation and placing it in a larger context. Evaluation Practice, 18, 147-163.
32. Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London, UK: SAGE.
33. Stame, N. (2004). Theory-based evaluation and types of complexity. Evaluation, 10, 58-76.
34. Stufflebeam, D.L. (2001). Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation, 89, 7-99.
35. Themessl-Huber, M.T., & Grutsch, M.A. (2003). The shifting locus of control in participatory evaluations. Evaluation, 9, 92-111.
36. United Nations Development Programme. (1997). Who are the question-makers? A participatory evaluation handbook. New York, NY: UNDP Office of Evaluation and Strategic Planning.
37. Uusikylä, P., & Valovirta, V. (2004). Three spheres of performance governance. Spanning the boundaries from single-organisation focus towards a partnership network. Paper presented at the European Group of Public Administration Annual Conference, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
38. van den Belt, M. (2004). Mediated modelling: A systems dynamic approach to environmental consensus building. Washington, DC: Island Press.
39. Vedung, E. (1997). Public policy and program evaluation. London, UK: Transaction Publishers.
40. Viveret, P. (1989). L'évaluation des politiques et des actions publiques-Propositions en vue de l'évaluation du revenu minimum d'insertion (Collection des rapports officiels). Paris, France: Rapports au Premier Ministre.
41. World Commission on Dams. (2000). Dams and development-A new framework for decision-making. London, UK: Earthscan Publications.