The study of institutionalisation of a national monitoring and evaluation system in Zimbabwe and Botswana.

Makadzange, Panganai Francis (2020-12)

Thesis (DPhil)--Stellenbosch University, 2020.

Thesis

ENGLISH SUMMARY: The aim of the study was to assess the extent to which Zimbabwe and Botswana’s national M&E systems are institutionalised. This was done through answering the following research questions: 1) What is currently known about the development of national M&E systems in Botswana and Zimbabwe; 2) What are the existing theories and frameworks that could be applied to investigate the development and institutionalisation of national M&E systems; 3) Where are the countries at in terms of the institutionalisation of their national M&E system.These research questions were addressed by conducting a study design enshrined within the revised atlas framework of Furubo, Rist and Sandahl (2002). The International Atlas of Evaluation framework is the first of its kind to provide a systematic overview of M&E systems in various parts of the world. I adopted the atlas (with high levels of confidence in terms of its reliability and validity) as the framework of choice to implement the study. An exploratory concurrent nested mixed method (qualitative and quantitative) was employed in this study with both primary and secondary data collected and analysed.The results show that the overall score against the revised atlas for Botswana was 40% andZimbabwe 53% indicating a rather average level of institutionalisation for both countries. The main driver emerged to be public sector reforms adopted and implemented by the two countries post-independence. Major stakeholders providing technical and financial support to the development and institutionalisation process were NGOs. Though for Zimbabwe the development was mainly driven by external pressure from the donors and other multilateral organizations such as UNDP, for Botswana the pressure was internal,and the government played a greater role in terms of providing the required financial support for the system. The main findings of the study show that both countries have made progress in institutionalising their national M&E systems. However, more is yet to be realised and it requires deliberate efforts to address all those important institutional constraints highlighted in this study. The key recommendation for Botswana is that the country should develop a national M&E policy whilst for Zimbabwe is that it should create a more democratic system that promote generation and utilisation of M&E information at all levels. Lastly it is recommended that more research of similar nature be done as more work is still needed to contribute to a better understanding of the African M&E landscape.

AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van die studie was om die mate van institusionalisering van nasionale M&E stelsels in Zimbabwe en Botswana te evalueer. Dit is gedoen deur die volgende navorsingsvrae te beantwoord: 1) Wat is huidiglik bekend rakende die ontwikkeling van nasionale M&E stelsels in Botswana en Zimbabwe; 2) Wat is die bestaande teorieë en raamwerke wat gebruik word om die ontwikkeling en institusionalisering van nasionale M&E stelsels te evalueer?; 3) Wat is die stand van institusionalisering van nasionale M&E stelsels in hierdie lande?; Die navorsingsvrae is ondersoek deur ‘n navorsingsontwerp wat ingebed is in die hersiene ‘atlas’-raamwerk van Furubo, Rist and Sandahl (2002). Die “International Atlas of Evaluation” benadering is die eerste raamwerk wat ʼn sistematiese oorsig te gee van evaluasiekulture in verskeie wêrelddele. In my studie het ek hierdie beandering gevolg deur gebruik te maak verkennende gelyktydige gemengde navorsingsmetode (kwalitatief en kwantitatief) met primêre en sekondêre data wat versamel en ontleed is. Die resultate toon dat the finale telling gemeet aan die hersiene atlas vir Botswana op 40% neergekom en vir Zimbabwe op 53% wat dui op ‘n uiters gemiddelde graad institusionalisering in beide lande. Die belangrikste drywer in beide lande was die hervormings wat in die openbare sektor geïniseer en geïmplementeer is na onafhanklikheidswording. Nie-regerings organisasies was die belangrikste belangegroepe wat tegniese en finansiële ondersteuning gebied het aan die ontwikkelings –en institusionaliserings proses. Alhoewel die ontwikkeling in Zimbabwe hoofsaaklik gedryf is deur eksterne druk vanaf die donateurs en ander multilaterale organisasies soos UNDP, was die druk in Botswana intern, en het die regering ‘n groter rol gespeel deur die nodige finansiële ondersteuning aan die stelsel te verleen. Die hoofbevindinge van die studie is dat beide lande ‘n mate van vordering gemaak met die institusionalisering van hul nasionale moniterings-en evaluasiestelsels. Daar moet egter nog heelwat meer werk gedoen word en dit vereis doelbewuste pogings om die belangrikste institusionale beperkings wat in hierdie studie uitgelig word, aan te spreek. Die belangrikste aanbeveling vir Botswana is die ontwikkeling van ‘n nasionale M&E beleid, terwyl Zimbabwe ‘n meer demokratiese sisteem in plek moet stel wat die voorbereiding en gebruik van M&E inligting op alle vlakke insluit .

This item appears in the following collections: