1. Pluralité des connaissances scientifiques et intervention publique: agriculture, environnement, et développement durable. Policy evaluation and empirical evidence : Lessons from the EBP methods. Rio Seminar, August, 29 th, 2008. Marielle BERRIET-SOLLIEC 1, Jacques BAUDRY 2, Pierre LABARTHE 3 1 ENESAD, UMR CESAER, Dijon (France) 2 INRA SAD Paysage, Rennes (France) 3 INRA SAD-APT, Paris (France)

2. Outlines of the presentation 1. The diversity of methods of policy evaluation and the problem of validity Evaluation models based on the program theory Three methods for the analysis of causal relations The lack of confrontation to field evidence Two examples: agricultural extension and agri-environment 2. EBP method and the evaluation of public policies Systematic reviews of scientific literature and the hierarchy of levels of evidence Quantitative methods to assess impacts 3. Implementation of quantitative/qualitative methods of evaluation The necessity of dedicated organizations A limit: lack of data for the test of hypothesis derived from theories about the schemes of causality induced by public policies

3. Pluralité des connaissances scientifiques et intervention publique: agriculture, environnement, et développement durable. Section 1. The diversity of methods of policy evaluation and the problem of empirical validity. Rio Seminar, August, 29 th, 2008.

4. The diversity of methods of policy evaluation and the problem of validity.  The evaluation model embedded in the program theory Definition (Hansen 2005) The difficulty of the identification of causal relations. Ex: agricultural extension (Labarthe 2006), agri-environment  Three methods for the description of schemes of causal relations Policy analysis : analysis of stakeholders networks and relations, and of the hierarchy of objectives / public policies (Berriet-Solliec 2007) Micro-economic scientific analysis of the relations between variables through modeling methodologies (Heckmman and al. 1999) Experimental settings (comparison between groups with public support and control group) conceived at the beginning of policy implementation

5. Illustration in the case of agricultural extension  Policy Analysis Ex: application of the Soft System Methodology method for designing public project of extension education (Navarro and al. 2008). Problem of the choice of stakeholders? No measurements of the impacts of the extension project  Micro-economic analysis Standard modeling aimed at determining the financial conditions of equilibrium between demand and supply (Dinar 1996, Dinar and Keynan 2001) Very low level of empirical content  Experimental methods Quasi-experimental methods (comparison of the productivity of a group of farmers with public extension, and a control group without extension) Very few examples of application (Davis and Nkonya 2008)

6. Illustration in the case of agri-environment 1. Agri-environment for biodiversity measures are based on obligation of means, not results Farmers adopt a measure on a voluntary basis, choose the field(s) where it will be applied They must have certain practices, they can be the ones they already have 2. The measures are short term, there is no monitoring the monitoring should include a pre-measure assessment of the fluctuations of the populations of the target species when only the beginning and the final year are monitored, it is difficult to assess the efficiency of the measure 3. The measures are based on field scale even an increase of a population in a field does not insure its global sustainability the area of land under the measure is not an ecological criteria

7. A major limit: a lack of confrontation to empirical evidence  The lack of field evidence Lack of data allowing to test hypothesis derived from theories about the schemes of causal relations of policies (Laurent 2007)   raises the question of the empirical content of evaluation methods : how are the hypothesis about causal relation tested and validated ? How is it possible to conciliate the building of theoretical models and the accumulation of the knowledge and observations from the fields? (Lawson 2003)  Evidence Based Policy (EBP) methods as a possible solution ?

8. Pluralité des connaissances scientifiques et intervention publique: agriculture, environnement, et développement durable. Section 2. The EBP Method Rio Seminar, August, 29 th, 2008.

9. EBP method: hierarchy of evidence, a key step  Classification of evaluation methods / quality in terms of empirical validity of the evidence produced 1. Opinion of respected authorities, based on clinical experience, descriptive studies or reports of expert committees. 2. Evidence from historical comparisons. Evidence from cohort or case- control analytical studies. 3. Evidence from well-designed controlled trials without randomization. 4. Evidence obtained from at least one properly randomized controlled trials. Level of empirical validity

10. EBP method: quantitative methods  ex-Post evaluation: test of hypothesis about causal relation of an implemented policy through quantitative methods of impact measurement (Zahm and al. 2008) Impact = Difference between the [situation with public support] and the [situation without public support] Two solutions : time comparison, or control comparison Difficulties: access to data, bias of selection  Main methodologies (Schmitt and al. 2008) Estimation on panel data Matching methods  Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches quantitative method: robustness of hypothesis / causal relation But no explanations about the mechanisms  need for combining them with qualitative approaches

11. Pluralité des connaissances scientifiques et intervention publique: agriculture, environnement, et développement durable. Section 3. Implementation: requirements and difficulties Rio Seminar, August, 29 th, 2008.

12. An illustration of a policy evaluation combining quantitative and qualitative methods. The case of agricultural extension  Very few examples. The IFRI project (Birner and al. 2006) Designing a systemic framework for the institutional analysis of the causal relations of the diverse reforms of agricultural extension services in different contexts: “from best practices to best fit” Using quantitative experimental methods for the evaluation of impacts  Some difficulties: diversity of contexts of applications of policies, lack of data  a need to perform field experiments and investigations lack of systematic analyses of the scientific literature about agricultural extension reforms.   a need for dedicated organizations for EBP and quantitative/qualitative methods of public policy evaluation?

13. EBP implementation: the need for dedicated organisations  An example: the Social Science Research Unit (SSRU) of London University (Olliver and al. 2005) collaboration with the EPPI-center proposes new models for systematic review of the scientific literature about researches combining quantitative and qualitative data  Goals of the construction of scientific state of the art: producing information for policymakers about their regulations setting up a framework for the evaluation of these regulations  Originality: distinction in the scientific literature between stakeholders’ opinions and impact studies combining new methodologies for evaluation and a theoretical analysis

14. EBP implementation: two difficulties. lack of data and theoretisation.  Limits of EBP approach (Cartwright 2007, Kirsch and Laurent 2007) The definition and status of “evidence” vary considerably among the numerous evaluations inspired by the EBP approach Lack of precision in the category of evidence used: does it really allow to test an hypothesis derived from a scientific theory about the causal relations induced by a public policy?  A major problem: data availability / high level of requirements a need for two groups: public supported group + control group a need for two types of variables: descriptive variable of each individual + indicators of performance / goals of the public policy a need for time-series and panel data  Yesterday’s Allsopp, Baudry & Burel presentation dealt with these questions

15. Pluralité des connaissances scientifiques et intervention publique: agriculture, environnement, et développement durable. Discussion. Rio Seminar, August, 29 th, 2008.

16. Discussion  EBP : a way to take into account empirical findings and empirical validity... but rarely used in ex ante evaluation in France  In ex post evaluation, a necessity to build indicators linked to potential effects (outcomes and impacts)  Evidence based agricultural policy does not exist yet... but its development needs political and financial specific supports creation of an Evidence Policy Center dedicated to agriculture and sustainable development  A link to critical realism (Lawson, 2003) and to scientific methods which pay attention to reality