1 / 14

Evaluation and Urban Planning: Charting New Territory

Evaluation and Urban Planning: Charting New Territory. Mark Seasons, Ph.D. School of Planning University of Waterloo 15 May 2000. Presentation. Background Study Finding Implications for Practice. Context. New ways of doing business Response to resource constraints

issac
Télécharger la présentation

Evaluation and Urban Planning: Charting New Territory

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. Evaluation and Urban Planning:Charting New Territory Mark Seasons, Ph.D. School of Planning University of Waterloo 15 May 2000

  2. Presentation • Background • Study Finding • Implications for Practice

  3. Context • New ways of doing business • Response to resource constraints • Concerns about effectiveness • Demands for accountability • Efficiency-driven organizations • Focus on performance measurement

  4. Study • What role(s) for monitoring and evaluation? • Directions from theory and literature? • Realities of practice? • Comparison and contrast • Lessons learned • Best practices

  5. Study • Monitoring and evaluation (M+E) - lots of discussion in literature • Part of rational planning model • Big issue in 1960’s, early 1970’s • Focus on quantitative techniques • Examples: cost-benefit, impact analysis

  6. Typical Monitoring Activities • Demography • Population • Economic patterns • Development trends • Infrastructure capacity • Natural environment (impacts)

  7. Study • Issue: what is nature of practice? • How much and type of M+E? • Gap between theory and practice – why so little M+E? • Research: literature review, content analysis and interviews • Senior planners from Ontario’s regional municipalities

  8. Study Findings • M+E done by every regional municipality • Nature and type varies widely • Typical: tracking development trends, demographics, staff performance • Atypical: probe for values, perceptions, use of sophisticated indicators • Innovations: report cards, focus groups

  9. Study Findings • Monitoring a regular activity • Evaluation episodic • Most do basic M+E • Issues: resource constraints, political will, organizational culture, time • Issue: evaluable plans and policies • Issue: appropriate indicators

  10. Enabling Factors • Staff, time, expertise • Learning organization • Evaluable goals, objectives, policies • Respect for policy, long-term planning • Clear, supportable rationale • Indicators – qualitative and quantitative • Consultation and participation

  11. Impediments • Resource constraints – real and perceived • Insecure organizational culture • Focus on “action”, short-term • Reliance on traditional quantitative data • Absence of political, administrative support • Ineffective indicators • Poor communications strategy

  12. Implications • M+E essential in performance-based decision-making environment • Process must be tailored to context • Must be easily managed, maintained • Indicators a critical element • Quantitative and qualitative data essential • Must be introduced incrementally

  13. Leaders • Hamilton-Wentworth (VISION 2020) • York Region (Report Card) • Seattle (Sustainable development) • Calgary (Transportation Plan)

  14. Applications • Land Use Policy Plans • Process Monitoring • Staff Performance • Special Purpose Policies • Support for Corporate Benchmarking

More Related