This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Gregory, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Problematizing Participation

A Critical Review of Approaches to Participation in Evaluation Theory

Hull University Business School, UK

It is widely accepted that evaluation is a social process which implies the need for a participatory approach. In this article, it will be argued that the blanket use of the term ‘participation’ has masked the heterogeneity evident in its realization in practice. This article highlights a lack of transparency in participatory methods in evaluation by, first of all, critically discussing Rebien's (1996) definition of a set of criteria for distinguishing participative projects from interventions that are non-participative or have a low level of participation. Rebien's work is important because it not only discusses participation from a practical perspective, but also from a methodological point of view, advancing the argument that Guba and Lincoln's (1989) Fourth Generation Evaluation is an appropriate methodology for supporting participation. Fourth Generation Evaluation will be described and critiqued with reference to Oakley's (1991) obstacles to participation. In the light of this critique, the argument will be advanced, through an examination of Patton's Utilization-Focused Evaluation (1986, 1997) and Pawson and Tilley's Realistic Evaluation (1997), that the notion of participation is ill-understood and is an important problem across a range of methodologies in evaluation. Guidance on how best to realize a participatory approach in practice will then be sought through examination of an approach to evaluation which has emerged from the systems field (Taket and White, 1995, 1996, 1997). Consequently, it will be argued that the problem of participation can only be approached through an understanding of power and its realization in practices that prohibit or promote participation.

Key Words: critique • evaluation • decisionmaking • participation • planning • stakeholder.

Evaluation, Vol. 6, No. 2, 179-199 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/13563890022209208


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P.-M. Daigneault and S. Jacob Toward Accurate Measurement of Participation: Rethinking the Conceptualization and Operationalization of Participatory Evaluation American Journal of Evaluation, September 1, 2009; 30(3): 330 - 348. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Hart, G. Diercks-O'Brien, and A. Powell Exploring Stakeholder Engagement in Impact Evaluation Planning in Educational Development Work Evaluation, July 1, 2009; 15(3): 285 - 306. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. C. Suarez-Herrera, J. Springett, and C. Kagan Critical Connections between Participatory Evaluation, Organizational Learning and Intentional Change in Pluralistic Organizations Evaluation, July 1, 2009; 15(3): 321 - 342. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. M. Diaz-Puente, J. L. Yague, and A. Afonso Building Evaluation Capacity in Spain: A Case Study of Rural Development and Empowerment in the European Union Eval Rev, October 1, 2008; 32(5): 478 - 506. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Conlin and R. L. Stirrat Current Challenges in Development Evaluation Evaluation, April 1, 2008; 14(2): 193 - 208. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. Zapico-Goni Matching Public Management, Accountability and Evaluation in Uncertain Contexts: A Practical Suggestion Evaluation, October 1, 2007; 13(4): 421 - 438. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Lehtonen Deliberative Democracy, Participation, and OECD Peer Reviews of Environmental Policies American Journal of Evaluation, June 1, 2006; 27(2): 185 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Pollitt Performance Information for Democracy: The Missing Link? Evaluation, January 1, 2006; 12(1): 38 - 55. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. Stern Editorial Evaluation, October 1, 2005; 11(4): 387 - 389. [PDF]

				J. Lennie An Evaluation Capacity-Building Process for Sustainable Community IT Initiatives: Empowering and Disempowering Impacts Evaluation, October 1, 2005; 11(4): 390 - 414. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. E. Thurston and L. Potvin Evaluability Assessment: A Tool for Incorporating Evaluation in Social Change Programmes Evaluation, October 1, 2003; 9(4): 453 - 469. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. McKie Rhetorical Spaces: Participation and Pragmatism in the Evaluation of Community Health Work Evaluation, July 1, 2003; 9(3): 307 - 324. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Murray Citizens' Control of Evaluations: Formulating and Assessing Alternatives Evaluation, January 1, 2002; 8(1): 81 - 100. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Hanberger Policy and Program Evaluation, Civil Society, and Democracy American Journal of Evaluation, June 1, 2001; 22(2): 211 - 228. [Abstract] [PDF]