Сравнение методов

	Participatory Impact Assessment	Theory-Based Impact Evaluation
Область	Development Studies	Development Studies
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Год появления	2014	2009
Автор метода	Andy Catley and colleagues, Feinstein International Center, Tufts University	Carol Weiss; Howard White (3ie)
Тип	Participatory project impact assessment method	Evaluation approach / framework
Основополагающий источник	Catley, A., Burns, J., Abebe, D., & Suji, O. (2014). Participatory Impact Assessment: A Design Guide. Somerville, MA: Feinstein International Center, Tufts University.	White, H. (2009). Theory-Based Impact Evaluation: Principles and Practice. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 1(3), 271–284.
Другие названия	PIA, Participatory Impact Evaluation, Community-Based Impact Assessment, Participatory Impact Measurement	Theory of Change Evaluation, Contribution Analysis, Theory-Driven Evaluation, Causal-Chain Impact Evaluation
Связанные	4	4
Сводка	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.	Theory-based impact evaluation evaluates a programme by first making explicit the theory of change — the causal chain of assumptions and mechanisms through which inputs are expected to produce outcomes and impacts — and then gathering evidence to test whether each link in that chain holds. Rather than treating the programme as a black box and estimating only the net effect, it asks not just whether a programme worked but why, for whom, and under what conditions. Articulated by Carol Weiss and brought into development practice by Howard White and 3ie, it complements, rather than competes with, counterfactual designs.