ODA evaluations change with the times, too. The changes take place in the two aspects of ODA-related practice and theoretical research on evaluation. The development of specialized disciplines related to international assistance, specialized international research based on the practice of evaluation, and straightening of systems related to diplomacy and international cooperation, as well as the maturing of public opinion, have brought about positive changes in the field of ODA evaluation. There is also no doubt that efforts by the Government of Japan, which has developed accountability systems, have had an influence on ODA evaluation. These include the Act on Access to Information Held by Administrative Organs (1999), the creation of the Incorporated Administrative Agency System and its evaluation system (1999), the Central Government Reform (2001), the establishment of the Government Policy Evaluation Act (2001), the establishment of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) as an incorporated administrative agency and the launch of its new evaluation system (2003), the Public Archives and Records Management Act (2009), and the Administrative Project Review (2011). Here, I wish to propose a “form-based” approach as a method for thinking about the factors behind these changes. This is because the circumstances of the times are often reflected in the “form,” and because the results that sometimes arise out of necessity become the “form.” The changes to “form” that I wish to raise here come in three stages: the stage of thick, full-scale materials; the stage in which many colored photographs and diagrams are used; and the stage in which the Internet becomes the primary media.The first stage was the era of the “Annual Evaluation Report on Japan’s Economic Cooperation,” which was about 30 years ago. This was when the report was published in a thick, black-and-white booklet in B5 size. The FY1992 edition, marking the 10th year of the publication of annual evaluation reports by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA), contained 429 pages. Other editions containing many pages were the FY1993 edition with 574 pages, and the FY1998 edition with 386 pages. At this stage, the descriptions were a combination of both introductory and specialized contents about ODA and evaluation. In particular, the FY1992 edition began with a preface titled “What is Evaluation?” and included detailed explanations about the current situation of ODA evaluation in Japan, organizational structure, relationship with JICA, and evaluation criteria and guidelines. The outline in the second section covered explanations on the types of evaluation and the practice of these types of evaluation, which covered country assistance evaluation, sector evaluation, joint evaluation, evaluation conducted by Japanese experts and international experts, and evaluation conducted by JICA and the Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund (OECF). The third section contained about 380 pages in a detailed explanation of the practical examples of the types of evaluation introduced in section 2, as well as detailed commentary about the situation in the ODA sites. In particular, the section that covered the achievements and problems with the structural adjustment program exudes a sense of history. This first stage is characterized by professional explanations about the fundamentals of ODA evaluation, making these reports invaluable to researchers who had no connection to ODA evaluation as well as the perfect teaching material for graduate school lectures. However, there were some weak points. Researchers who had no connection to ODA, the general public, those living in the regions, and foreign researchers would not Column30 Years of the Annual Reports on Japan’s ODA Evaluation 07Annual Report on Japan’s ODA Evaluation 2022YAMAYA KiyoshiProfessor, Faculty of Policy Studies Doshisha University / Adviser, The Japan Evaluation Society
元のページ ../index.html#8