La popularité croissante des approches participatives représente une tendance lourde dans le champ de l’évaluation des politiques. La prolifération des définitions et des termes utilisés pour désigner la participation génère cependant beaucoup de confusion chez les chercheurs et praticiens du domaine. Il n’existe en outre aucun instrument de mesure adéquat de la participation, ce qui freine l’avancement des connaissances. Trois questions de recherche structurent cette thèse : 1) Qu’est-ce que la participation à l’évaluation?; 2) Comment traduire ce concept en un instrument de mesure opérationnel?; et 3) Est-ce que cet instrument mesure la participation de manière fidèle et valide? Une conceptualisation cohérente de l’évaluation participative s’inscrivant dans la foulée des travaux de Cousins et Whitmore (1998) est d’abord proposée. Cette conceptualisation, fondée sur la logique des conditions nécessaires et suffisantes, est opérationnalisée en un instrument de mesure de la participation. L’instrument (Participatory Evaluation Measurement Instrument – PEMI) fait ensuite l’objet d’une validation empirique à partir d’un échantillon de 40 cas d’évaluation tirés de la littérature et d’un sondage auprès de leurs auteurs. Trois éléments sont appréciés quantitativement : 1) la fidélité intercodeur; 2) la convergence des scores des codeurs et des auteurs sur le PEMI; et 3) la convergence des scores des auteurs sur le PEMI et un instrument de mesure alternatif. De manière générale, cette étude suggère que le PEMI génère des scores dont la fidélité et la validité sont d’un niveau acceptable. Troisièmement, une étude de validation du PEMI combinant méthodes qualitatives et quantitatives est présentée. Le recours aux méthodes mixtes a généré un cycle inattendu – mais bénéfique – de révision de l’instrument et de validation quantitative supplémentaire. Les résultats de validation suggèrent que la version révisée du PEMI, désormais fondée sur une structure conceptuelle hybride, est plus en phase avec l’opinion des répondants quant au niveau de participation des cas d’évaluation. La valeur ajoutée des méthodes mixtes à des fins de validation est également discutée. Une réflexion sur le potentiel scientifique de l’instrument de mesure, en particulier dans le cadre de recherches empiriques sur la relation entre participation et utilisation de l’évaluation, vient conclure cette thèse. / The growing popularity of participatory approaches represents an important trend in the field of program evaluation. The proliferation of definitions and terms used to designate stakeholder participation, however, generates a lot of confusion among researchers and practitioners. Moreover, the dearth of adequate instruments to measure participation hinders knowledge accumulation. This dissertation is structured around three research questions: 1) What is stakeholder participation in evaluation? 2) How is this concept translated into an operational measurement instrument? and 3) Does this instrument allow for the reliable and valid measurement of stakeholder participation? A systematic and coherent conceptualization of participatory evaluation is first proposed based on the work of Cousins and Whitmore (1998). This conceptualization, which is based on the logic of necessary and sufficient conditions, is operationalized in a measurement instrument. The instrument (Participatory Evaluation Measurement Instrument – PEMI) is then empirically validated using a sample of 40 evaluation cases from the literature and a survey of their authors. Three elements are quantitatively assessed: 1) intercoder reliability; 2) convergence between coders’ and authors’ scores on the PEMI; and 3) convergence between authors’ scores on the PEMI and an alternative measurement instrument. Considered globally, this study suggests that the PEMI can generate reliable and valid scores. Finally, a validation study combining qualitative and quantitative methods is presented. The use of mixed methods has generated an unexpected but most welcome cycle of instrument revision and further quantitative validation. The validation results suggest that the revised version of the PEMI, now based on a hybrid conceptual structure, is more in line with our respondents’ opinions with respect to the level of stakeholder participation in their particular evaluation case. The added value of mixed methods for validation purposes is also discussed using counterfactual reasoning. Reflections on the scientific and practical potential of the measurement instrument, on the relationship between stakeholder participation and evaluation use in particular, conclude this dissertation.

Dans le présent mémoire, on se questionne sur la portée et la signification que l’on peut légitimement attribuer à la déclaration de 2011 du premier ministre britannique David Cameron concernant « l’échec du multiculturalisme d’État ». Plus précisément, est-ce que cet échec déclaré du multiculturalisme s’en prend à la construction théorique et normative du multiculturalisme ? Rejette-t-il plutôt l’aménagement politico-institutionnel du multiculturalisme en Grande-Bretagne ? À cet égard, est-ce qu’on observe un retrait effectif des politiques du multiculturalisme en Grande-Bretagne, entre 2000 et 2015 ? D’une approche analytique de la philosophie politique, cette recherche propose d’interpréter et de comprendre les débats qui ont cours en ce qui concerne le multiculturalisme de manière générale, puis en Grande-Bretagne plus particulièrement. Ce faisant, le présent mémoire est animé par deux objectifs : d’abord, il s’agit d’opérer une clarification conceptuelle du multiculturalisme, selon qu’on l’appréhende au titre d’appréciation factuelle socioculturelle (diversité), en tant qu’ensemble théorique et normatif (pluralisme), ou encore comme aménagement institutionnel et politique (politique publique). Ensuite, il s’agit d’observer, empiriquement et de manière systématique, l’état et l’évolution du multiculturalisme comme politique publique en Grande-Bretagne, entre 2000 et 2015. Pour ce faire, on reprend la structure méthodologique du Multicultural Policy Index, élaboré par Keith Banting et Will Kymlicka. Notre contribution originale à la littérature consiste ainsi à mettre à jour les données de cet Index pour le cas de la Grande-Bretagne, en date de 2015. En un mot, on observe une relative stabilité des politiques du multiculturalisme entre 2000 et 2015, alors que pour la même période les gouvernements britanniques critiquent de plus en plus négativement le multiculturalisme, allant jusqu’à en déclarer l’échec. Enfin, on cherche à interpréter ce phénomène, tout comme on force un dialogue entre les principales critiques émises à l’égard du multiculturalisme et les principaux théoriciens de celui-ci. / In 2011, Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron declared that “state-multiculturalism has failed”. In this research, I question the scope and meaning one can legitimately attribute to that declaration. In his speech, was Cameron speaking about the failure of multiculturalism understood as a theoretical and normative framework? Was he rather referring to the failure of multiculturalism in its political and institutional arrangements? As a matter of consequence, are we observing a political retreat of multicultural policy in the UK, between 2000 and 2015? I seized those questions through an analytic political philosophy perspective, where I intended to properly interpret and understand the debates surrounding multiculturalism in general, and their expression in Great Britain in particular. On the one hand, this research pursues the objective to clarify the conceptual framework of “multiculturalism”, whether one refers to it to indicate a factual socio-cultural reality (diversity), whether one refers to it on behalf of its theoretical and normative design (pluralism), or whether one refers to it as some political and institutional arrangements (public policy). On the other hand, I propose to observe empirically and systematically the state as well as the evolution of British multicultural policy, in between 2000 and 2015. In so doing, I replicate the methodological framework of the Multicultural Policy Index, designed by Keith Banting and Will Kymlicka. The original contribution of this research therefore consists of updating the data base for the Index, as for 2015. In the end, we conclude to a relative stability for the UK multicultural policy framework for the past fifteen years, where we otherwise observe a significant shift in the political appreciation of multiculturalism, as David Cameron 2011 famous declaration shows. I conclude by interpreting this quite paradoxical phenomenon, as I also confront the major critics addressed to multiculturalism to the understanding of some of its main theorists.

La popularité croissante des approches participatives représente une tendance lourde dans le champ de l’évaluation des politiques. La prolifération des définitions et des termes utilisés pour désigner la participation génère cependant beaucoup de confusion chez les chercheurs et praticiens du domaine. Il n’existe en outre aucun instrument de mesure adéquat de la participation, ce qui freine l’avancement des connaissances. Trois questions de recherche structurent cette thèse : 1) Qu’est-ce que la participation à l’évaluation?; 2) Comment traduire ce concept en un instrument de mesure opérationnel?; et 3) Est-ce que cet instrument mesure la participation de manière fidèle et valide? Une conceptualisation cohérente de l’évaluation participative s’inscrivant dans la foulée des travaux de Cousins et Whitmore (1998) est d’abord proposée. Cette conceptualisation, fondée sur la logique des conditions nécessaires et suffisantes, est opérationnalisée en un instrument de mesure de la participation. L’instrument (Participatory Evaluation Measurement Instrument – PEMI) fait ensuite l’objet d’une validation empirique à partir d’un échantillon de 40 cas d’évaluation tirés de la littérature et d’un sondage auprès de leurs auteurs. Trois éléments sont appréciés quantitativement : 1) la fidélité intercodeur; 2) la convergence des scores des codeurs et des auteurs sur le PEMI; et 3) la convergence des scores des auteurs sur le PEMI et un instrument de mesure alternatif. De manière générale, cette étude suggère que le PEMI génère des scores dont la fidélité et la validité sont d’un niveau acceptable. Troisièmement, une étude de validation du PEMI combinant méthodes qualitatives et quantitatives est présentée. Le recours aux méthodes mixtes a généré un cycle inattendu – mais bénéfique – de révision de l’instrument et de validation quantitative supplémentaire. Les résultats de validation suggèrent que la version révisée du PEMI, désormais fondée sur une structure conceptuelle hybride, est plus en phase avec l’opinion des répondants quant au niveau de participation des cas d’évaluation. La valeur ajoutée des méthodes mixtes à des fins de validation est également discutée. Une réflexion sur le potentiel scientifique de l’instrument de mesure, en particulier dans le cadre de recherches empiriques sur la relation entre participation et utilisation de l’évaluation, vient conclure cette thèse. / The growing popularity of participatory approaches represents an important trend in the field of program evaluation. The proliferation of definitions and terms used to designate stakeholder participation, however, generates a lot of confusion among researchers and practitioners. Moreover, the dearth of adequate instruments to measure participation hinders knowledge accumulation. This dissertation is structured around three research questions: 1) What is stakeholder participation in evaluation? 2) How is this concept translated into an operational measurement instrument? and 3) Does this instrument allow for the reliable and valid measurement of stakeholder participation? A systematic and coherent conceptualization of participatory evaluation is first proposed based on the work of Cousins and Whitmore (1998). This conceptualization, which is based on the logic of necessary and sufficient conditions, is operationalized in a measurement instrument. The instrument (Participatory Evaluation Measurement Instrument – PEMI) is then empirically validated using a sample of 40 evaluation cases from the literature and a survey of their authors. Three elements are quantitatively assessed: 1) intercoder reliability; 2) convergence between coders’ and authors’ scores on the PEMI; and 3) convergence between authors’ scores on the PEMI and an alternative measurement instrument. Considered globally, this study suggests that the PEMI can generate reliable and valid scores. Finally, a validation study combining qualitative and quantitative methods is presented. The use of mixed methods has generated an unexpected but most welcome cycle of instrument revision and further quantitative validation. The validation results suggest that the revised version of the PEMI, now based on a hybrid conceptual structure, is more in line with our respondents’ opinions with respect to the level of stakeholder participation in their particular evaluation case. The added value of mixed methods for validation purposes is also discussed using counterfactual reasoning. Reflections on the scientific and practical potential of the measurement instrument, on the relationship between stakeholder participation and evaluation use in particular, conclude this dissertation.

No description available.

This dissertation studies political dynasties in democratic countries. Dynasties are common in all professions. However, for the profession of politics, in which succession depends no longer on dynastic succession but on running successful electoral campaigns, understanding how and why political power can be bequeathed is particularly important. Factors such as name recognition (the voter demand side) and political networks (the elite supply side) are potential explanations of the continued presence of dynasties in parliaments. This dissertation studies both the voter demand side and the elite supply side of the phenomenon. I first discuss the related literature on political dynasties, political selection, political quality, and the personal vote. Voting for dynasties can be rational, and the presence of dynastic legislators perfectly legitimate. Political dynasties may thrive in electoral systems that encourage personal voting, such as is used in Belgium. In a first paper, I show that in the Belgian 2010 General Election voters preferred dynastic candidates. Institutional changes may change such (dynastic) elite equilibria. In a second paper, we exploit the constituency-level variation in the franchise extension associated with the Second and Third Reform Acts in Britain. However, we find no effect of these reforms on the position of dynasties or the aristocracy in politics. Changes to the political career of legislators may also affect their chances of establishing or continuing a dynasty. The third paper studies dynasties in the UK House of Commons. I employ random variation in tenure length introduced by winning vs. losing a first re-election by a narrow margin. Surprisingly, I find no effect of tenure length on an MP’s chances of establishing a dynasty in the nineteenth century. However, selection into cabinet is more likely if the MP had a relative in the cabinet before.

This thesis presents a case study of Welsh innovation policy from the period of political devolution (1999) to the present day (2014), exploring the role of regional government as a driver of innovation and economic development. It proposes a multi-theoretical framework to be employed in the study of real world innovation interventions, to illicit nuanced insights into the Wales case study, and also to test the applicability of key regional innovation theories in a weaker region context. The four regional innovation theories identified as the most prominent in both academic literature and policy, and incorporated into the conceptual framework of this study are: systems of innovation, clusters, the learning region, and the triple helix. The case study presented consists of a systematic review of Welsh innovation and related policy since devolution and in-depth interviews with key stakeholders in the Welsh innovation system. The Welsh approach to innovation is found to have evolved in three distinct phases, whereby innovation is prioritised differently relative to other policy spheres, and the dominant approach to innovation varies over time. Innovation interventions have met with varying levels of success, and, interestingly, the most prominent approaches have been, on the whole, less successful in Wales. This thesis argues that no one theory is ideally suited to the analysis and development of innovation policy in weaker regions; instead it draws on the strengths of the four key theories identified. It argues against a “one-size-fits-all” approach to innovation policy, premised on exporting models from exceptional leading regions in a manner that is geographically, historically, and culturally blind. It supports a move away from normative approaches to the study and practice of innovation policy, instead drawing on the different theoretical elements that are particularly relevant to the case in question.

This thesis examines the role of two international organisations (IOs), the OECD DAC and the World Bank, in shaping the international aid effectiveness agenda, a policy agenda encouraging reforms of foreign aid policy to improve foreign aid. With particular emphasis on a period in the 1990s, when both IOs faced criticism and the need to adapt to changing geopolitics, it argues that the OECD DAC and the World Bank contributed to shaping the aid effectiveness agenda, and specifically the policy problems the agenda highlights and the policy solutions it recommends, in ways tied directly to these IOs’ specific fields of expertise and their unique institutional interests at the time. In doing so, both IOs adapted, evolved, and expanded the mechanisms by which they exercise their authority as international expert bureaucracies, and both strategically expanded the way in which they interact with their political environment. As a consequence, both IOs helped shape the present-day ideational framework among foreign aid experts and policymakers on how more effective foreign aid is achieved, which, in turn, favours the authority of both these IOs to advice and to act in the efforts to improve the effectiveness of foreign aid. Helping to shape the aid effectiveness agenda thus allowed the OECD DAC and the World Bank to strengthen their authority as expert bureaucracies in this specialised field of policy.

This thesis is a study of environmental governance reform in China. It investigates how new governance policies and arrangements are being introduced in order to overcome problems associated with China’s sizable environmental protection ‘implementation deficit’. Using an analytical framework based on ‘good governance’ criteria of accountability, transparency, participation, and rule of law, it focuses on developments within China’s environmental state, which includes state agencies and their policies, and civil society, incorporating environmental protection NGOs, citizen activists, and the media. Based on in-depth, qualitative research, this thesis examines several aspects of environmental governance reform in China: attempts to make local officials pay greater attention to environmental issues, formal public participation legislation and mechanisms, information disclosure, and ‘private interest’ activism. This thesis identifies interactions between the environmental state and civil society as vital in establishing new, more participatory governance processes. Through acting as ‘policy pioneers’, environmental activists can consolidate governance reforms emanating from the environmental state, and promote new governance norms. At the same time, however, this thesis identifies significant obstacles to the establishment of a more inclusive ‘governance’ approach to environmental protection in China that goes beyond Party-state institutions and actors. For this reason, it challenges the argument that China’s system of environmental governance is likely to converge any further with those observed in western liberal democracies.

The thesis explores everyday resistance in post-conflict statebuilding. Despite the turn in peace and conflict studies to study everyday forms of resistance, the concept and the account of its practices remain limited. In addressing these limitations, the thesis develops an alternative account of both resistance and post-conflict statebuilding. Following the framework of James Scott, resistance is understood as the pattern of acts of individuals and collectives in a position of subordination against the everyday experience of domination. What is resisted is not an externally driven liberal intervention, but the coercive and extractive practices fostered by statebuilding. These dynamics are examined through the case of Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, focusing on the provinces of North and South Kivu. Generally studied as a paradigmatic case of state-failure, the DRC provides an insight into post-conflict statebuilding as a plural, improvised and contradictory process. In the thesis, this is linked to historical and sociological practices of statebuilding more generally, and to the specificities of the African political space. Although statebuilding claims to be a strategy to restore state authority, peace, and democracy, the result has so far been a militarised environment, a pluralisation of state authority and a deterioration of living conditions. The thesis examines discursive, violent and survival practices that deny statebuilders the claim to legitimate authority and to the monopoly of violence, while enacting alternative channels of re-appropriation based on solidarity and reciprocity. Post-conflict statebuilding does not require a special framework of resistance. It requires a historicised account of practices, which grasps their heterogeneity and gradients, and which ultimately accounts for resistance as a prosaic presence in the relations of domination that sustain statebuilding.

This thesis explores the place of the Bondo secret society, whose precondition for membership is female genital cutting (FGC), in Sierra Leone’s post-war politics. The Bondo society is considered a repository of gendered knowledge that bestows members with significant forms of power in the local social context. Members, especially Bondo society leaders, are dedicated to the continued practice of FGC even amidst calls for its eradication. The Bondo is much sought after and overwhelmingly supported by the political elite due to the role it plays in ordering community life and its position as the depository of cultural repertoires (Swidler, 2001:24). Most women gravitate towards the Bondo who also use it to shape and reshape their identity. For example, as part of post war recovery, I argue, the Bondo was employed by political actors to legitimate and extend the hegemony of political movements. This analysis, therefore, examines the complicated interplay of power between politicians and the Bondo society members in the context of an international outcry against the practice of FGC. The thesis argues that the Bondo society leaders are keen to maintain the status quo because of the forms of power accessible to them in the local socio-economic and political context. Faced with an over-arching discourse of eradication and change concerning the FGC procedure, the Bondo society has in turn fashioned a counter-discourse framed in terms of “defending traditional culture” to forestall changes that could affect the “privileges” they access. I explore the tensions of this situation in this thesis. That is, on the one hand, the tension brought about by opposition between the FGC reform agenda and the Bondo society members’ attempts to resist change in the ritual practice. On the other hand, I am concerned with the tension in the patronage they enjoy from politicians who are caught up in a double bind situation: they simultaneously need support from Bondo members but are, at the same time, reliant on international development aid. In exploring power from below, I examine Bondo society’s community stock of knowledge and how this symbolic power is employed in Sierra Leonean politics. This does not lead to a vindication of FGC but underscores the complex social, economic and political meanings embedded in the Bondo and in discourses of power in Sierra Leone. The thesis points out that eradication advocates need to take account of the various dimensions of the Bondo society’s embeddedness in relation to both state and society.