IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i19p10334-d647587.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disability Data Collection in a Complex Humanitarian Organisation: Lessons from a Realist Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Claire F. O’Reilly

    (School of Linguistic, Speech & Communication Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, D02 PN40 Dublin, Ireland)

  • Louise Caffrey

    (School of Social Work and Social Policy, Trinity College Dublin, D02 PN40 Dublin, Ireland)

  • Caroline Jagoe

    (School of Linguistic, Speech & Communication Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, D02 PN40 Dublin, Ireland)

Abstract

In recent years, global attention to disability inclusion in humanitarian and development contexts, notably comprising disability inclusion within the Sustainable Development Goals, has significantly increased. As a result, UN agencies and programmes are increasingly seeking to understand and increase the extent to which persons with disabilities are accounted for and included in their efforts to provide life-saving assistance. To explore the effects and effectiveness of such measurement, this paper applies a complexity-informed, realist evaluation methodology to a case study of a single measurement intervention. This intervention, ‘A9’, was the first indicator designed to measure the number of persons with disabilities assisted annually by the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP). Realist logic of analysis combined with complexity theory was employed to generate context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOC’s) against which primary interviews and secondary data were analysed. We show that within the complexity of the WFP system, the roll-out of the A9 measurement intervention generated delayed, counter-intuitive and unanticipated effects. In turn, path dependency and emergent behaviours meant that the intervention mechanisms of yesterday were destined to become the implementation context of tomorrow. These findings challenge the current reliance on quantitative data within humanitarian-development disability inclusion efforts and contribute to our understanding of how data can best be leveraged to support inclusion in such contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Claire F. O’Reilly & Louise Caffrey & Caroline Jagoe, 2021. "Disability Data Collection in a Complex Humanitarian Organisation: Lessons from a Realist Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-12, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:19:p:10334-:d:647587
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/19/10334/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/19/10334/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Cilliers, 2001. "Boundaries, Hierarchies And Networks In Complex Systems," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 135-147.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Caffrey, Louise & Browne, Freda, 2023. "The challenge of implementation in complex, adaptive child welfare systems: A realist synthesis of signs of safety," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nugus, Peter & Carroll, Katherine & Hewett, David G. & Short, Alison & Forero, Roberto & Braithwaite, Jeffrey, 2010. "Integrated care in the emergency department: A complex adaptive systems perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(11), pages 1997-2004, December.
    2. Richard Meissner & Inga Jacobs, 2016. "Theorising complex water governance in Africa: the case of the proposed Epupa Dam on the Kunene River," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 21-48, February.
    3. Mark A. Phillips & Jagjit Singh Srai, 2018. "Exploring Emerging Ecosystem Boundaries: Defining ‘The Game’," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(08), pages 1-21, December.
    4. Francesca Froy, 2023. "Learning from architectural theory about how cities work as complex and evolving spatial systems," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 16(3), pages 495-510.
    5. Keith R. Skene, 2021. "No goal is an island: the implications of systems theory for the Sustainable Development Goals," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 9993-10012, July.
    6. Richard Marcantonio & Agustin Fuentes, 2020. "A Clear Past and a Murky Future: Life in the Anthropocene on the Pampana River, Sierra Leone," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, March.
    7. Ron Martin & Peter Sunley, 2010. "Complexity Thinking and Evolutionary Economic Geography," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Omid Omidvar & Roman Kislov, 2016. "R&D Consortia As Boundary Organisations: Misalignment And Asymmetry Of Boundary Management," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Quan Liu & Ayeley Tchangani & François Pérès & Vicente Gonzalez-Prida, 2018. "Object-oriented Bayesian network for complex system risk assessment," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 232(4), pages 340-351, August.
    10. Rhodes, Tim & Lancaster, Kari, 2019. "Evidence-making interventions in health: A conceptual framing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Krzakiewicz Kazimierz & Cyfert Szymon, 2012. "The Role of Leaders in Managing Organisation Boundaries," Management, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 7-22, May.
    12. Christopher A. Hartwell, 2017. "Understanding “Development”: Insights from Some Aspects of Complexity Theory," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 165-190, November.
    13. Vatankhah, Sanaz & Bamshad, Vahideh & Altinay, Levent & De Vita, Glauco, 2023. "Understanding business model development through the lens of complexity theory: Enablers and barriers," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 155(PA).
    14. Nicolò Barbieri & Davide Consoli & Lorenzo Napolitano & François Perruchas & Emanuele Pugliese & Angelica Sbardella, 2023. "Regional technological capabilities and green opportunities in Europe," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 749-778, April.
    15. Stefan Verweij, 2013. "Book Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(6), pages 794-796, November.
    16. Nadine Ostern & Guido Perscheid & Caroline Reelitz & Jürgen Moormann, 2021. "Keeping pace with the healthcare transformation: a literature review and research agenda for a new decade of health information systems research," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(4), pages 901-921, December.
    17. Camaren Peter & Mark Swilling, 2014. "Linking Complexity and Sustainability Theories: Implications for Modeling Sustainability Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-29, March.
    18. Marton Gosztonyi, 2023. "Comparative Analysis of X-Y-Z Generation Entrepreneurs in a Semi-Peripheral EU Member Country: Insights from Regularized Regression Techniques," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 191-217.
    19. Kok, Kristiaan P.W. & Loeber, Anne M.C. & Grin, John, 2021. "Politics of complexity: Conceptualizing agency, power and powering in the transitional dynamics of complex adaptive systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    20. Phillips, Mark A. & Ritala, Paavo, 2019. "A complex adaptive systems agenda for ecosystem research methodology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:19:p:10334-:d:647587. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.