Читать книгу An Introduction to Evaluation - Chris Fox - Страница 48

Generally, this means that participants, contributors and evaluation stakeholders more broadly will incur no harm if and when they decide to participate. This principle needs to be mainstreamed throughout and influence the overall evaluation rationale and process – from the selection of the methods to the actual implementation of these. In short, the evaluator must ensure that the evaluation by its design and implementation follows the principle of ‘do no harm’.

It is necessary to ensure that participants are not put through any personal duress and that in no circumstance are they to have their safety compromised. Personal duress can emerge from situations where participants are asked personal questions that put them in an uncomfortable position (e.g. health evaluations, evaluations that require interviewing rape victims or the victims of violent conflicts).

The safety of participants can be easily compromised, particularly in cases where evaluators do not think more broadly about these issues. In some contexts the very fact that participants are seen talking to the evaluator may pose a risk to them in their communities (e.g. interviewing women in certain communities, or young people who belong to certain gangs).

Hence, the evaluator at the evaluation planning stage must identify not only which situations in the course of the evaluation are more likely to pose a risk to evaluation participants, but also why and how, and put measures in place to avoid these. The ‘do no harm’ rule must be core to evaluators’ considerations on risks and mitigation strategies.