Enhancing the inclusion of gender and sexually diverse populations in evaluation: Reflections grounded in practice
| Author | Stephen Neville,Jeffery Adams |
| Published date | 01 December 2021 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1035719X211043674 |
| Date | 01 December 2021 |
| Subject Matter | Practice Article |
Practice Article
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
2021, Vol. 21(4) 189–205
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1035719X211043674
journals.sagepub.com/home/evj
Enhancing the inclusion of
gender and sexually diverse
populations in evaluation:
Reflections grounded in
practice
Jeffery Adams
SHORE & Whariki Research Centre, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand
Stephen Neville
Department of Nursing, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
Abstract
Evaluators are committed to practice that is high quality and conducted ethically.
Despite this, gender and sexually diverse populations are not always adequately
considered in evaluation practice. Ensuring fuller inclusion of gender and sexually
diverse people is required to give effect to human rights obligations and to enable
comparatively poorer wellbeing outcomes for these groups to be addressed. Based on
our experience conducting evaluation (and research) with both general populations
and gender and sexually diverse populations, we suggest a need to build inclusive
practice among evaluators. To guide inclusive evaluation practice, we outline three
domains for consideration –terminology and language, processes of research inclusion
and implications of inclusion. These are not offered as a checklist but as a way to
encourage reflexive practice among evaluators. Given evaluators are often concerned
with promoting equity and social justice, we are hopeful that actions taken by eval-
uators can enhance the inclusion of gender and sexually diverse people in evaluation
activities and contribute to better wellbeing outcomes for them.
Corresponding author:
Jeffery Adams, SHORE & Whariki Research Centre, Massey University, PO Box 6137, Victoria Street
West, Auckland 1142, New Zealand.
Email: j.b.adams@massey.ac.nz
Keywords
cultural responsiveness, LGBTQ, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender
expression, ethics, inclusion, programme evaluation
Introduction
Integral to undertaking evaluation is a commitment to high quality practice that is
conducted ethically. Depending on the jurisdiction, formal guidance to foster such
practice may exist. Within the Australian Evaluation Society, for example, members
agree to a code of ethics, which among other things, requires that: ‘Members should
consider the interests of the full range of stakeholders in their evaluation work, in-
cluding the broader public interest, and in particular, the potential impacts of differ-
ences and inequalities in society’(Australasian Evaluation Society, 2013a, p. 2).
Similar requirements are present in codes and guides to evaluation practice in other
jurisdictions, including New Zealand (Social Policy Evaluation and Research Unit &
Aoteraroa New Zealand Evaluation Association, 2015), the United Kingdom (UK)
(UK Evaluation Society, 2018), Canada (Canadian Evaluation Society, 2014) and the
United States of America (USA) (American Evaluation Assocation, 2018).
In this article, we take the position that gender and sexually diverse populations are
often not adequately considered in evaluation practice. We use the term gender and
sexually diverse people to mean ‘anyone who identifies as part of the lesbian, gay,
bisexual, queer, intersex, trans and nonbinary communities; however, they identify
themselves’(Henrickson et al., 2020, p. 1). Our goal is to encourage evaluation practice
that is more inclusive, particularly within evaluation projects that focus on ‘general’
populations. We draw on our experiences conducting evaluation with both general
populations and gender and sexually diverse populations to promote a pragmatic
approach, grounded in everyday practice, to encourage more inclusive and culturally
responsive practice. We outline why more inclusive evaluation practice is desirable and
address some of the reasons for this not happening. We provide key considerations for
evaluators to reflect upon when planning and undertaking evaluation activity.
Why inclusive practice is needed
Two lines of argument support evaluators championing inclusive practice. From a
human rights perspective, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 1948)
states that all people are born free and equal in dignity and rights, without distinction of
any kind (United Nations, 2021). Subsequently, the Yogyakarta Principles were de-
veloped to address human rights standards and their application to issues of sexual
orientation and gender identity (International Commission of Jurists, 2007). However,
despite such proclamations, a range of regressive practices internationally continue to
limit gender and sexually diverse people’s full and open inclusion in society. While a
general trend of improvement and support for global norms relating to gender and
190 Evaluation Journal of Australasia 21(4)
To continue reading
Request your trial