Bandingkan metode
Tinjau metode pilihan Anda berdampingan; baris yang berbeda akan disorot.
| Participatory Impact Assessment× | Participatory Rural Appraisal× | |
|---|---|---|
| Bidang≠ | Development Studies | Anthropology |
| Keluarga | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Tahun asal≠ | 2014 | 1994 |
| Pencetus≠ | Andy Catley and colleagues, Feinstein International Center, Tufts University | Robert Chambers and collaborators |
| Tipe≠ | Participatory project impact assessment method | Family of participatory field appraisal and planning methods |
| Sumber perintis≠ | Catley, A., Burns, J., Abebe, D., & Suji, O. (2014). Participatory Impact Assessment: A Design Guide. Somerville, MA: Feinstein International Center, Tufts University. link ↗ | Chambers, R. (1994). The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal. World Development, 22(7), 953–969. DOI ↗ |
| Alias | PIA, Participatory Impact Evaluation, Community-Based Impact Assessment, Participatory Impact Measurement | PRA, Participatory Learning and Action, Participatory Rural Appraisal Methods, PLA |
| Terkait≠ | 4 | 2 |
| Ringkasan≠ | Participatory Impact Assessment (PIA) is an approach to measuring the impact of development and humanitarian projects in which the affected communities define the indicators of change and use participatory tools to quantify it. Developed and codified by Andy Catley and colleagues at Tufts University's Feinstein International Center, largely through work on livestock and livelihoods programmes in pastoralist settings, PIA adapts participatory rural appraisal methods to the disciplined logic of impact evaluation — combining locally meaningful indicators with before-and-after and with-and-without comparisons to assess what a project actually changed. | Participatory rural appraisal is a growing family of approaches and methods that enable local people to share, enhance, and analyze their own knowledge of their lives and conditions, and to plan and act on it. Associated above all with Robert Chambers, PRA reverses the conventional research relationship: outside facilitators hand over the stick, and community members themselves do the mapping, ranking, diagramming, and analysis that drive planning and action. |
| ScholarGateSet data ↗ |
|
|