Towards embedding African methodologies in evaluations: Context Matters

Is it possible that the methods and procedures used in evaluations are still culturally biased and still trapped in the historical moment. This has provoked my thinking about evaluations being entrenched in the culturalist notions of the Global North. Surely, the Global North methods, paradigms and theories cannot be ‘one size fit all’ as their applicability needs to be contextually relevant and ‘fit for purposes’. This is because the cultures across the globe are not homogeneous; each has its own uniqueness – therefore calls for different methods that are likely to be sync with culture, values and norms of a particular geographical location. Chilisa (2012) who said that ‘culture is lived realities, knowledge systems and values’. It is therefore understandable to refute a reductionist approach whereby the world is perceived and seen in one colour. This implies deconstructing the Global North epistemological paradigms and adopting our own endogenous and indigenous paradigms, designed by Africans and for African ‘worldviews’.
There have been calls for ‘Made in Africa’ evaluations and or ‘Africanisation of evaluations’ as well as Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS). The critical questions is: How feasible are these evaluations in a world where development programmes and evaluations thereof in Africa are based on Aid and or philanthropic programmes (Moore and Zenda 2012)?. The system is very complex and deconstructing the system is a process than an event. There is substantial evidence with respect to: Who requests the evaluation?, Who sets the evaluation standards? And Who writes the terms of reference?
The Terms of References by big international organisations prescribes the existing theories and approaches needed for evaluations and even the need for evaluators from donor countries. African theories and approaches are non-existent in evaluation space (if ever they are there or exist).
There is further evidence pointing out at the dominance of the Global North evaluation literature. Spring and Patel (n.d) conducted a review of bibliography of evaluations and the results were shocking. The bulk of the evaluations were requested by donors and international agencies. The bulk of the first authors were Western names and not African. Evaluation imperialism is continuously seen through the current domineering of evaluation approaches, theories, frameworks, and practices essentially coined in the USA, Canada and Britain (Mouton, Rabie, De Coning & Cloete 2014). Sadly, the African education systems responsible for embedding evaluation knowledge are still by the Global North knowledge. As long as the evaluation educational systems remain as is, influencing Africanised evaluations may remain a utopia. Well renowned global evaluation icons theories and approaches remain the staple food for any African scholar who want to learn monitoring and evaluation.
Many African countries for example Zambia, South Africa, Uganda, Ghana, Kenya and Benin are now developing their own cadre of evaluation through different mechanisms. Additionally, many of these are developed their national M&E policies – could this be an entry point for integrating African methods in evaluations of national interests?
Is there hope for African countries to have evaluations with an ‘African face’ and that are contextually relevant. This panel discussion seeks to unpack, describe and explain
(i) Where African methods have been used in research and or evaluation studies
(ii) What are some of the challenges that can be envisaged in pursuit of decolonisation of evaluations or Made in Africa or use of IKS
(iii) How can African rooted methods be integrated into evaluation studies and or M&E systems?
(iv) Raise awareness of the African Evaluation Blog website hosted by SAMEA