1 / 22

What should be in a systematic review?

This presentation discusses the key components of a systematic review and its importance in evaluating the effectiveness of various interventions. It also highlights the implementation experience, beneficiary knowledge, outputs produced, and intermediate and final outcomes of rural electrification projects. The review concludes that targeting has been more successful when focusing on farmers who are amongst the better-off, but less successful when targeting the poor and women without these attributes. The presentation aims to encourage more comprehensive systematic reviews to better inform policy decisions.

jwing
Download Presentation

What should be in a systematic review?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation What should be in a systematic review? Howard White, 3ie Campbell Colloquium Chicago May 2013

  2. Effectiveness matters 30-50% reduction in mortality

  3. Source: Gelb and Clark, ‘The Biometrics Revolution’, CGD, 2013

  4. Major policy shifts: • Private sector involvement • Poverty focus • Pro-environment Just 7 per cent of a total of 120 RE and energy projects mentioned poverty in their objectives Total around US$3 billion

  5. Rural electrification design • 82% build infrastructure and 85% have institutional development • Tariff conditionality: 1/3 projects prior 1995, 14% thereafter • One quarter address rehabilitation or system losses • Few have explicitly pro-poor components (only two subsidize connection charge)

  6. RET & Off grid electrification • Rapid growth: only 2 off-grid projects before 1995 and 31 after • Most (75%) include photovoltaic, usually solar home systems • Others are micro-hydro (34%) and wind power (31%)

  7. Focus of Farmer Field Schools

  8. Causal chain evidence matrix Links in the causal chain The rows are by intervention, not study

  9. Evidence matrix: targeting FFS Does targeting work? Who participates? Who is targeted? Who doesn’t (and why?) How?

  10. Evidence matrix: vertical synthesis Vertical synthesis

  11. Vertical integration: target groups

  12. Vertical synthesis: Targeting mechanisms Categorical 45 Individual/household assessment 26 10 20 2 1 Self-selection 18

  13. Evidence matrix: horizontal synthesis Horizontal synthesis

  14. Horizontal synthesis 1

  15. Horizontal synthesis 2

  16. Evidence matrix: overall synthesis Overall synthesis Targeting has worked where it has targeted the farmers who are amongst the better off (as more educated, social leaders, more land, right crop etc.) but been less successful – though there are exceptions – when targeting the poor and women who don’t have these attributes

  17. Evidence matrix: overall synthesis Sub-group synthesis

  18. So what goes in a systematic review? • Design and importance: Define intervention, its dimensions and design (global portfolio review) • Implementation experience • Beneficiary knowledge, perceptions and participation (access/use) • Outputs produced • Intermediate and final outcomes (effectiveness)

  19. Rural electrification: outputs • Bangladesh: rural connections near 0 in early 80s to more than 4 million in 2002 of which Bank 600,000 (15%) • Indonesia: coverage rose 33 to 85% from 1993 to 2003, 11 million new h/h, of which 10 million under First and Second Indonesia RE projects (1/2 paid for by Bank) • Laos: 1993-2004 coverage from 14-45%

  20. And so what about effectiveness? Grid ERR=28% Off-gird ERR=21%

  21. Conclusions • Systematic reviewing is a method in which the approach should be systematic, but that need not be restricted to effectiveness • By addressing a broader range of policy questions SRs will be of interest to a broader range of policy makers • … And more interesting to read Thank you. Go forth and influence policy

More Related