Evaluation of Large-Scale Public-Sector Reforms: A comparative analysis
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Evaluation of Large-Scale Public-Sector Reforms : A comparative analysis. / Breidahl, Karen N.; Gjelstrup, Gunnar; Hansen, Hanne Foss; Balle Hansen, Morten.
In: American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 38, No. 2, 4, 2017, p. 226-245.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of Large-Scale Public-Sector Reforms
T2 - A comparative analysis
AU - Breidahl, Karen N.
AU - Gjelstrup, Gunnar
AU - Hansen, Hanne Foss
AU - Balle Hansen, Morten
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Research on the evaluation of large-scale public-sector reforms is rare. This article sets out to fill that gap in the evaluation literature and argues that it is of vital importance since the impact of such reforms is considerable and they change the context in which evaluations of other and more delimited policy areas take place. In our analysis, we apply four governance perspectives (rational-instrumental perspective, rational interest–based perspective, institutional-cultural perspective, and chaos perspective) in a comparative analysis of the evaluations of two large-scale public-sector reforms in Denmark and Norway. We compare the evaluation process (focus and purpose), the evaluators, and the organization of the evaluation, as well as the utilization of the evaluation results. The analysis uncovers several significant findings including how the initial organization of the evaluation shows strong impact on the utilization of the evaluation and how evaluators can approach the challenges of evaluating large-scale reforms.
AB - Research on the evaluation of large-scale public-sector reforms is rare. This article sets out to fill that gap in the evaluation literature and argues that it is of vital importance since the impact of such reforms is considerable and they change the context in which evaluations of other and more delimited policy areas take place. In our analysis, we apply four governance perspectives (rational-instrumental perspective, rational interest–based perspective, institutional-cultural perspective, and chaos perspective) in a comparative analysis of the evaluations of two large-scale public-sector reforms in Denmark and Norway. We compare the evaluation process (focus and purpose), the evaluators, and the organization of the evaluation, as well as the utilization of the evaluation results. The analysis uncovers several significant findings including how the initial organization of the evaluation shows strong impact on the utilization of the evaluation and how evaluators can approach the challenges of evaluating large-scale reforms.
KW - Faculty of Social Sciences
KW - evaluation use
KW - meta-evaluation
KW - multilevel evaluation
KW - governance
KW - reform
U2 - 10.1177/1098214016660612
DO - 10.1177/1098214016660612
M3 - Journal article
VL - 38
SP - 226
EP - 245
JO - American Journal of Evaluation
JF - American Journal of Evaluation
SN - 1098-2140
IS - 2
M1 - 4
ER -
ID: 164830763