Editorial
| Author | John Guenther |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X231151460 |
| Published date | 01 March 2023 |
| Date | 01 March 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Editorial |
Editorial
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
2023, Vol. 23(1) 3–5
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1035719X231151460
journals.sagepub.com/home/evj
Editorial
John Guenther
Welcome to the first issue of the Evaluation Journal of Australasia for 2023. While the
worst of COVID-19 is behind us, the lessons learned from evaluation work in the
pandemic, continue to be important –and this is reflected in two of our articles in this
issue. And of course, while the pragmatics of working in COVID-19 environment are
still fresh in our minds, my own view is that as evaluators we should be using our
learnings to generate theoretical knowledge that enables us to generalise and think
critically –if not creatively too –about change, complexity, policy, challenging
contexts, power, ethics and philosophical positions of being, valuing and knowing. Too
often, evaluation is criticised for its inability to generate new knowledge, to build
theory and to generalise beyond a program, policy or intervention (see Wanzer, 2021,
for a useful comparison of research and evaluation). We should –or at least could –be
asking ourselves (and commissioners of evaluation) what impact our work has on the
development of theories of social change, of philosophical positions within inter-
cultural practice, and of the role that power plays to influence policy and program
outcomes. As evaluators and authors, I believe it is important to challenge false
stereotypes of evaluation and promote the deep thinking work that evaluators do.
The article by Catherine Street and colleagues from Curijo takes a step in this
direction and offers a critically reflexive examination of evaluation governance through
a theoretical lens of culturally adaptive governance and evaluation. Importantly, the
authors offer some pragmatic and practical insights into how the theory actually looks
like when put into practice. But rather than suggesting they have the answers, the
authors caution potential users of a ‘Culturally Adaptive Governance Framework’to be
mindful of recognising power dynamics such that ‘white fragility’might drive or-
ganisational actions, while ignoring sovereignty and treaty considerations in practice.
The article is a timely contribution in the light of the release of the First Nations
Cultural Safety Framework (Gollan & Stacey, 2021). Having a framework may be
useful, but it does not guarantee cultural security.
The practice article from Ihoghosa Iyamu and colleagues at the Vancouver based
Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences shines a spotlight on develop-
mental evaluation during the COVID-19 pandemic. The article points to practical
adaptations that evaluators made in response to the changing context. These adaptations
should not come as a surprise, indeed as I have suggested elsewhere, the need for
To continue reading
Request your trial