• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Publish What You FundPublish What You Fund

The Global Campaign for Aid and Development Transparency

  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Bluesky

NEWSLETTER

CONTACT

  • Why it matters
    • Why transparency matters
    • Data use examples
    • Research into aid transparency
    • The Story of Aid Transparency
    • What you can do
    • Case studies
  • Aid Index
    • 2024 Index
    • 2022 Index
    • Comparison Chart
    • Methodology
    • Index Archive
    • Tools
    • The Power of the Aid Transparency Index
  • DFI Index
    • DFI Transparency Index 2023
    • DFI Research
    • DFI Transparency Tool
    • FAQs
  • Our Work
    • Women’s Economic Empowerment
    • Localisation
    • Mobilisation
    • Climate Finance
    • UK Aid Transparency
    • Gender Financing
    • Humanitarian Transparency
    • US Foreign Assistance
    • IATI Decipher
    • Webinars
    • Work Under Development
  • News
    • Reports
    • News
    • Events
    • Blog
  • About Us
    • Board
    • Team
    • Our transparency
    • Our Funders
    • Jobs
    • Annual Reports
    • Friends of…
    • FAQs
  • Training
Show Search
Hide Search
Home / News / New York University’s Aid Watch – What Would The Poor Say: Debates in Aid Evaluation
news

New York University’s Aid Watch – What Would The Poor Say: Debates in Aid Evaluation

By Katie Welford | Feb 6, 2009 | News

(USA) – A conference at NYU debated the issues surrounding aid transparency, accountability and evaluation, including the Director of Publish What You Fund, Karin Christiansen. You can see her presentation here.

William Easterly argued inadequate transparency, feedback and accountability mechanisms are undermining aid effectiveness.

Lant Pritchett argued naïve technocrat approaches to evaluation can produce the worst outcome for the poor. He sets out the need to an understanding of the political economy of policy making, and that evaluation approaches in development need move to real-time feedback loops rather than randomised trialling approaches. This little ‘e’ approach moves beyond just find the most cost-effective policy/program designs, but help to positively inform policy.

A report of the conference

Primary Sidebar

NEWS Topics

Africa Agriculture Aid transparency Aid Transparency Index Australia Canada Climate Change Data Revolution Data use Data Visualisation Development Finance institutions DFI Spotlight DFI Transparency Tool European Commission Financing for Development France Freedom of Information Gender Germany Humanitarian Impact International Aid Transparency Initiative Japan Jobs Joined-up data Kenya Letters Localisation MDGs mobilisation Newsletter OECD Open data Open government Press Releases Publish What You Fund Road to 2015 Sustainable Development Goals UK United Nations US USAID Webinar Women's Economic Empowerment World Bank

Twitter (X)

  • Contact Us
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Bluesky

Publish What You Fund. China Works, 100 Black Prince Road, London, SE1 7SJ
UK Company Registration Number 07676886 (England and Wales); Registered Charity Number 1158362 (England and Wales)