Transcript of "International standards where there is no evidence? (Rob Allport et al)"
Livestock Emergency Guidelines and Standards Where There Is No Evidence? Developinginternational standards and guidelines with limited “hard evidence” Rob Allport, Philippe Ankers, Andy Catley, David Hadrill, Guido Govoni, Solomon Hailemarium, Ong-orn Prasarnphanich, Cathy Watson 28th ALNAP Annual Meeting on Evidence and Knowledge in Humanitarian Action, Washington DC, March 2013
Developing LEGS• High demand• Limited evaluation and impact assessment cf. humanitarian assistance in general• No peer-reviewed papers• Description of activity – very common – Tendency for agencies to view activity as impact – Flaws in setting objectives/describing activity
Process Multi-agency Steering Group Field experience Understanding contexts Overall decisions on structure and contentSphere Practitioner Plausibility “Hard evidence” experienceCross-cutting Email contributions Biological logic of Impact assessmentsthemes Review of drafts strategies and Benefit-cost analysisCore standards activities Systematic participatory impact assessment Triangulate
Handling weak evidence• Acknowledge deficits in evidence, advise caution where needed• Encourage impact assessment o M&E as a LEGS Common Standard o LEGS as a reference point for evaluation o Agency-level issues• Continuous feedback; frequent revision• Timeframes for change – accepting new evidence