Evaluating virtual informations sources: the case of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006
Martin Korcek
Wageningen, 2006
Thesis supervisor: Sander Van den Burg
Environmental Policy Department
Social Science Group
Wageningen University
SUMMARY
In this Thesis I deal with the supporting of the project development and implementation by virtual information sources. The objective of this research was to develop a model for evaluating such virtual sources of information. This model was applied to the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006.
The Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 was an unprecedented online venture organizedby the United Nations Development Programme Bratislava Regional Centre (UNDP BRC) and the Sub-regional Resource Facility Arab States (SURF AS). This virtual fair was a three days event and was the first virtual event for the regions of Eastern Europe, Central Asia, the Middle East and Northern Africa. Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 focused on Global water crisis and Water governance and was following the Human Development Report (HDR) 2006, launched by United Nations Development Programme.
I defined and compared different models of policy evaluation to develop a model for the evaluation of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006. I analyzed three evaluation models: the European Environmental Agency (EEA) policy evaluation model, the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) evaluation model and the World Bank evaluation model. The EEA policy evaluation model seemed the most suitable to evaluate the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006. The structure of this model consists of the Inputs, Outputs, Outcomes and Impacts. There are also supported parts as the Objectives of legislation and Needs of society that had to be adapted regarding to the evaluation of the virtual sources. How this model was used for evaluation is described in Conceptual chapter.
Criteria for evaluation are based upon the “Good Governance” principles. The principles as: the Respect human rights, Legitimacy and participation in governance, Subsidiary and Social integration, Fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of resources, Rule of law and transparency, Responsiveness effectiveness and efficiency and Good project management were incorporated to the Survey questions to provide the answer to the research question “How does Virtual Water Knowledge Fair perform according to the Good governance principles?”.
Data collection was executed by the quantitative research approach in the form of the Survey questionnaire. Collected data were analyzed, compared and evaluated. The survey was carried out in period from 15 of November until 26 of November 2006 among a population group comprising of 576 registered participants of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006. It was assumed that close to 80 % of the respondents of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 Survey had a very positive overall impression about the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006.
The Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 enabled long-term collaboration of water professionals around the world, the exchange of good practices and the establishment of new partnerships. The results of the evaluation of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 are showing that this virtual event is leading to the broadening of the horizons, enabling the exchange of experiences and ideas, showcasing some of the innovative approaches to water governance and finally to the reaching of the good water governance.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY………………………………………………………………….…………………………..3
TABLE OF CONTENT…….....……………………………………….………………………….....5
FOREWORD…………………………………………………………………………………………...7
ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………………………….……...9
1. INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER ……………………………………..………………………...11
2. POLICY EVALUATION CHAPTER …………………………………………………….…15
2.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………….15
2.2 Policy evaluation models ………………………………………………………...………….17
2.2.1 Identification of the Policy evaluation models…………………………………………….…17
2.2.2 European Environmental Agency (EEA) policy evaluation model……………………………17
2.2.3 Global Environmental Facility (GEF) evaluation model………………………………...…..20
2.2.4 World Bank evaluation model ………………………………………………….……….24
2.3 Possibility to applying Policy evaluation models on Virtual portals of information……...25
2.3.1 Identifying the criteria of evaluation and the evaluation questions ……………………………..26
2.4 Good governance principles in relation to the evaluation of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006………………………………………………………………………………...……28
3. CASE OF VIRTUAL WATRE KNOWLEDGE FAIR 2006 CHAPTER ………...….33
3.1 Methodology and research approach…………………………………………………….….33
3.1.1 Research methodology...... 33
3.1.2 Organization of the data collection ……………………………………………………….33
3.2 Applying the developed model to Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006…………….…..…35
3.2.1 Inputs………………………………………………………………………….….….35
3.2.2 Outputs...... 37
3.2.3 Outcomes...... 38
3.2.4 Impacts...... 41
4. SURVEY ANALYSIS AND RESULTS CHAPTER……………………………….…..….43
4.1 Survey…………………………………………………………………………………………43
4.1.1 Aims…………………………………………………………………………………43
4.2 Analysis and Results…………………………………………………………………………45
4.2.1 Personal information………………………………………………………..…………..45
4.2.2 Overall Evaluation of Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006…………………………..…….49
4.2.3 Relation of Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 to principles of good governance…………….....54
4.2.4 The possibilities for improvement and participation in Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006……..56
5. CONCLUSION, RECONMENDATIONS CHAPTER …………………….………….59
5.1 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………...…………….59
5.2 Recommendations ……………………………………………………………...……………60
REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………………….61
SUPPLEMENTS: QUESTIONAIRE…………………………………………………….…….65
FOREWORD
In my diploma thesis Ihave decided to deal with raising need to use Virtual tools as Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 to reach Good governance by sufficient project development and implementation.
This diploma thesis wants to provide some specific evaluative information about Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006. Sharing of information and dealing with personal experiences is the most crucial focusing point in Knowledge management. It could help with more efficient and progressive reaching of the Millennium Development Goals and Good governance.
In recent years, the ability to use Virtual portals as Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006, has increased. This was neglected in the past because of not sufficient mediums for dealing with information. In present time the virtual portals and open sources of information are very progressively developing. This new approaches opened to wide spectrum of scientists brings also a lot of questions connected with its development.
In connection with bigger interest in Governance trough information1 also associated activities as Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 are appearing. These forms of Knowledge became more available mainly for communities of scientists. It appears as a good tool to fulfil the gap in Environmental governance of Water related issues. There is the question if these sources of knowledge are helping experts and practitioners with their work. If the information provided by these open sources are enough useful for further use. Analysis and evaluation of Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 will give me the answer to these questions.
My higher intention was to discover more about participant’s attitudes towards Virtual sources of information by means of a practical survey focusing on evaluation of the Virtual Water knowledge Fair 2006.
I would like to thank to Mr. Sander vanden Burg for his assistance by writing this diploma thesis and also Mr.Juerg Staudenmann who supervised my data collection process in United Nations Development Programme Bratislava Regional Centre.
ABBREVIATIONS
CIS – Commonwealth of Independent States
CO – Country Office
ECIS – Europe and CIS
EU – European Union
FP – Focal Point
GEF – Global Environmental Facility
IT – Information Technology
KM – Knowledge management
MDG – Millennium Development Goals
NHDR – National Human Development Report
NGO – Non Government Organization
OECD – Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
PR – Public Relations
PSPD – Program Support Project Document
RBEC – Regional Bureau for Europe and CIS
RBAS – Regional Bureau for Arab States
SURF – Regional Resource Facility, originally Sub-regional Resource Facility
SURF AS– Regional Resource Facility Arab States, originally Sub-regional Resource Facility Arab States
UNDP – United Nations Development Programme
UNDP BRC – United Nations Development Programme Bratislava Regional Centre
UNEP – United Nations Environmental Programme
UNV – United Nations Volunteer
WB – World Bank
1. INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER
Motto:
“What do we mean by an “information society”? We mean one in which human capacity is expanded, built up, nourished and liberated, by giving people access to the tools and technologies they need, with the education and training to use them effectively. The hurdle here is more political than financial. The costs of connectivity, computers and mobile telephones can be brought down. These assets -- these bridges to a better life -- can be made universally affordable and accessible. We must sum on the will to do it”
( Tunis, 16 November 2005, STATEMENT BY H. E. MR. KOFI ANNAN
THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS, World Summit on the Information Society )1
In today’s world of information the researchers and practitioner in the field of water governance interact and communicate with each other through the virtual sources. At the same time it is essential to use adequate communication tools to share knowledge and ideas. Our world has become a place where the distances between people can be bridged by virtual tools. In the 21st century every scientist, practitioner or ordinary person need to be prepared for hypercomunication in multicultural society, which has especially developed in Europe. Moreover, every person has to communicate with people from all over the world, whist the character of this communication is certainly become increasingly developing.
The goal of environmental policy scientists is to secure developing and implementation of environmental projects around the world what is necessary for reaching of good governance. To achieve this goal in modern information society, we need to have sufficient tools and technologies. Raising awareness of information technologies and abilities to use these advanced sources of knowledge should definitely become an important objective of modern scientist. The pressure for developing of the virtual sources of information is recently significantly growing3.
Overall, the main idea of this thesis is to demonstrate that International Water Governance could be fostered through Virtual Information sources as Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006. The evaluation of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 should successfully contribute to the improvement of experts and practitioners towards their own as well as the others prosperity. On the whole, one’s knowledge of reliable sources of data is definitely an integral part of modern scientist.
Effective using of Virtual information sources has impact on national, regional and global levels. It represents a component of the global process and a basis for equal participation of all countries in the global dialogue. To become effective, this process should be based on interaction of all interested stakeholders: governments, private sector, civil society, and international organizations. Consequently, if we desire our experts to use their skills to genuinely communicate in the “global village” of Virtual portals, awareness about its functionality is crucial. The aim of the following thesis is to evaluate one of these Virtual sources of knowledge, Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006. This thesis has been divided into two major parts: a theoretical and practical part.
The theoretical part of this thesis discusses, in detail, essential parts of the sound evaluation4. These include Preliminaries, Foundations, Sub-evaluations and Conclusions. These parts include subsequent practical parts chosen for their relevance in the practical part of the thesis.
In practical part, a questionnaire method was used with the purpose to survey a selected group of experts and practitioners in related field. The aim was to discover participant’s attitudes towards virtual sources of information, especially Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006. The survey was conducted on the assumption that using of Virtual sources of information can be evaluated thought the evaluation of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006.
In my research I focused on the evaluation of Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 in order to support project development and implementation of Water related projects within regions of CIS, North Africa and Arab States.
The main research questions, which this thesis aimed to answer, are:
· Can virtual tool like Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 be evaluated with policy evaluation models?
· How to support project development and implementation of Water related projects through the virtual information sources as Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006?
The specified sub questions to the main questions are:
· What are the criteria to evaluate Virtual portals of information in general?
· To what extend is policy evaluation model applicable for evaluation of Virtual Water Knowledge fair?
· How does Virtual Water Knowledge Fair perform according to the Good governance principles?
· What are the impacts of Virtual Water Knowledge Fair on Knowledge management and projects development and implementation?
· What are the recommendations of Virtual Water Knowledge Fair?
Outline of the Thesis
In my thesis I am elaborating the issue of the evaluation virtual sources of information and possibilities for applying of the policy evaluation models on the virtual information sources. I am also focusing on possibilities for supporting of the project development and implementation trough the virtual information sources.
In chapter 2, I am introducing the issue of the policy evaluation models. I am focusing on the three models and that are: European Environmental Agency (EEA) policy evaluation model, Global Environmental Facility (GEF) policy evaluation model and the World Bank evaluation model. These models are described and compared. Based on the findings I identify the criteria of evaluation and evaluation questions. Based on these findings I am deriving the possibilities to applying Policy evaluation models on the Virtual sources of information. Elaboration the Good governance principles in relation to the evaluation of the Virtual information sources is next part of this chapter.
Chapter 3 continues with the case of Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 and possibilities for applying policy evaluation model on it. In the first part of this chapter I am dealing with research methodology and approach. Following that I am applying developed policy evaluation model to the case of the Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006.
In chapter 4, I am dealing with the Survey. I am indicating the aims of the Survey and analyzing the results. The collected data serves as the baseline for answering of my Thesis research questions. The conclusion and recommendations are final chapter of my Thesis.
2. POLICY EVALUATION CHAPTER
2.1 Introduction
To find out if virtual tool like Virtual Water Knowledge Fair 2006 could be evaluated with policy evaluation models, I have to define what is hidden behind the term of evaluation.
Evaluation as a term includes “values”, not just the information that should be collected, but more over the quality of this information. Interpretation of the findings is crucial part of sound evaluation. The question „Are we being effective?“5 is always the first one when we are trying to evaluate new project, product, process, policy or the other issues. To find areas of improvement and to assess overall quality are the reasons why the evaluation is conducted. In evaluation it is more important to identify how valuable is something, than just describe of some process. Following this, it is important to rank some product in scale. To define “merit” and “worth” is starting point6. Merit is quality and worth is value of something. We can find more often worth or value in evaluation questions.