Producing Gender Injustice: Quantified Evaluation as a Logic in International Development

Abstract

Large donor agencies that fund international development projects use measurement systems to track how their funds are utilized in faraway places, claiming these systems provide data about “what works” for global poverty reduction. My research extends prior studies of global indices to critically examine how metrics transform the functioning of everyday development projects. The research focuses on an East African instance of a 20-country agricultural initiative by a large bilateral donor, said to result in women’s empowerment and measured by a standardized evaluation system. I completed 60 interviews with development professionals across 4 large implementing organizations, 3 evaluation organizations, and the donor. I also completed participant observation at international conferences and analyzed evaluation documents. Through 3 articles, I demonstrate that the simple counts meant to measure development project performance elicit pernicious reactions resulting in detrimental effects on: learning "what works" for development, professional interest in qualitative knowledge production about structural inequalities, and the inclusion of gender-related efforts in development programming. I theorize transnational evaluation systems as a logic that coordinates development work and show how and why evaluation practices reshape organizational structures, everyday practices, and power relationships in ways that are inescapable even for skeptical professionals.