Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Monitoring and evaluation practices are in constant transformation and respond to different principles and interests. Evaluating means assigning value. It implies measuring, describing and interpreting. In relation to development... more
Monitoring and evaluation practices are in constant transformation and respond to different principles and interests. Evaluating means assigning value. It implies measuring, describing and interpreting. In relation to development cooperation, it also involves negotiating opinions and worldviews and, in the case of South-South Cooperation (SSC) more specifically, such dialogue must be conducted in a horizontal manner. Thus, it is a practice permeated by political conceptions and, as such, it is important to promote transparency and encourage the debate on the elements that underpin evaluations – i.e. their objectives, criteria, indicators, methods and uses. Ignoring such elements can compromise the emergence of critical reflection and learning that evaluations can and should generate.
This document is based on the “Dialogues on Brazilian South-South Cooperation” held in Rio de Janeiro, in January 2017. The event was organized by the BRICS Policy Center in collaboration with the Brazilian Cooperation Agency (ABC) and with the support of the South-South Cooperation Research and Policy Centre (Articulação Sul). It brought together SSC actors from twelve countries, as well as a significant number of Brazilian implementing agencies and international organizations. This document is authored by experts and researchers from Articulação Sul and the BRICS Policy Center. The views contained here do not express the official position of the Brazilian Cooperation Agency nor that of any of the individuals or the institutions they represent, who have actively participated in the “Dialogues”. The report, therefore, presents the authors’ own reflections on the ongoing debate on how to strengthen SSC Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) systems so they are capable of accounting for the diversity of practices and contexts that constitute the field of SSC.
BRICS Policy Center, South-South Cooperation Research and Policy Centre, Brazilian Agency of Cooperation. Paths for Developing South-South Cooperation Monitoring and Evaluation Systems. Brasília, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 1st edition, Brasília, 2017.
This document is based on the “Dialogues on Brazilian South-South Cooperation” held in Rio de Janeiro, in January 2017. The event was organized by the BRICS Policy Center in collaboration with the Brazilian Cooperation Agency (ABC) and with the support of the South-South Cooperation Research and Policy Centre (Articulação Sul). It brought together SSC actors from twelve countries, as well as a significant number of Brazilian implementing agencies and international organizations. This document is authored by experts and researchers from Articulação Sul and the BRICS Policy Center. The views contained here do not express the official position of the Brazilian Cooperation Agency nor that of any of the individuals or the institutions they represent, who have actively participated in the “Dialogues”. The report, therefore, presents the authors’ own reflections on the ongoing debate on how to strengthen SSC Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) systems so they are capable of accounting for the diversity of practices and contexts that constitute the field of SSC.
BRICS Policy Center, South-South Cooperation Research and Policy Centre, Brazilian Agency of Cooperation. Paths for Developing South-South Cooperation Monitoring and Evaluation Systems. Brasília, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 1st edition, Brasília, 2017.
Research Interests:
This paper provides an overview of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) practices from different institutions engaged in South-South development cooperation (SSDC) and triangular development cooperation (TrC) in Brazil, based on a literature... more
This paper provides an overview of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) practices from different institutions
engaged in South-South development cooperation (SSDC) and triangular development cooperation (TrC)
in Brazil, based on a literature and document review and semi-structured interviews with 13 Brazilian and
international institutions.
The findings corroborate the initial hypothesis that there is no unified M&E system for Brazilian development
cooperation but heterogeneous M&E practices. These practices are mainly focused on outputs and shaped by
the Brazilian Cooperation Agency’s parameters as well as those of the executing institutions.
The challenges and pitfalls identified by domestic and international institutions involved in Brazil’s SSDC/
TrC showed the growing awareness of the need to prioritize M&E. However, heterogeneous concepts of
evaluation and diversified institutional contexts suggest that a broad and cross-sectorial debate could
enhance construction of a unified framework for Brazilian development cooperation, working hand in hand
with general discussions on South-South cooperation and international development governance.
engaged in South-South development cooperation (SSDC) and triangular development cooperation (TrC)
in Brazil, based on a literature and document review and semi-structured interviews with 13 Brazilian and
international institutions.
The findings corroborate the initial hypothesis that there is no unified M&E system for Brazilian development
cooperation but heterogeneous M&E practices. These practices are mainly focused on outputs and shaped by
the Brazilian Cooperation Agency’s parameters as well as those of the executing institutions.
The challenges and pitfalls identified by domestic and international institutions involved in Brazil’s SSDC/
TrC showed the growing awareness of the need to prioritize M&E. However, heterogeneous concepts of
evaluation and diversified institutional contexts suggest that a broad and cross-sectorial debate could
enhance construction of a unified framework for Brazilian development cooperation, working hand in hand
with general discussions on South-South cooperation and international development governance.
Research Interests:
Estimulado pela percepção de um crescente uso do termo “resiliência” em documentos oficiais, em ambientes acadêmicos e no vocabulário popular, o presente trabalho procura explorar as condições para a propagação do termo, assim... more
Estimulado pela percepção de um crescente uso do termo “resiliência” em documentos oficiais, em ambientes acadêmicos e no vocabulário popular, o presente trabalho procura explorar as condições para a propagação do termo, assim como as consequências de seu uso em políticas públicas. O conceito, popularizado no contexto da disciplina da biologia, foi transportado para as ciências sociais a partir de uma aproximação entre as racionalidades da ecologia e da economia. Este movimento de aproximação resultou em uma nova concepção do mundo social como complexo, permeado por toda sorte de riscos, e habitado por sujeitos fundamentalmente vulneráveis. A ampla mobilização do conceito na Nova Agenda Urbana, principal documento da ONU-Habitat para a formulação de políticas urbanas, demonstra o grau de legitimidade conquistado pela ideia de resiliência urbana. Para melhor entendermos como esta ideia é invocada na prática, analisaremos seu uso nos contextos do Furacão Katrina, quando atingiu o sul dos Estados Unidos, em 2005, e no rompimento da barragem da Samarco em Mariana, ocorrido em 2015 em Minas Gerais.