| Method Criteria | Surveys | Rapid Appraisal | Participant Observation | Case Studies | Participatory Learning and Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coverage (scale of applicability) | High | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
| Representative-ness | High | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
| Ease of data standardisation, aggregation and synthesis | High | Medium | Medium to Low | Low | Medium to Low |
| Ability to isolate and measure non-intervention causes of change | High | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| Ability to cope with the problem of attribution | High | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
| Ability to capture qualitative information about poverty reduction | Low | High | High | High | High |
| Ability to capture causal processes of poverty and vulnerability | Low | High | High | Medium | High |
| Ability to capture diversity of perceptions about poverty | Low | High | High | Medium | High |
| Ability to elicit views of women, minorities and other disadvantaged groups about poverty | Low | Medium?? | High | High - if targeted | Medium?? |
| Ability to capture unexpected negative impacts on ‘the poor’ | Low | High | Very High | High | High |
| Ability to identify and articulate felt needs | Low | High | High | Medium to Low | High |
| Degree of participation of ‘the poor’ encouraged by the method | Low | High | Medium | Medium | Very High |
| Potential to contribute to building capacity of stakeholders with respect to poverty analysis | Low | High | Low | Medium to Low | Very High |
| Probability of enhancing downwards accountability to poor groups and communities | Low | High | Medium | Medium | High |
| Ability to capture the multidimensionality of poverty | Low | Medium | High | Medium | Very High |
| Ability to capture poverty impact at different levels e.g. individual, household, community | Low | Medium | High | Low | High |
| Human resource requirements | Specialist supervision, large numbers of less qualified field workers | High skilled practitioners who are able to analyse and write up results | Mid-skilled practitioners. Long time commitment. Need good supervision | Mid-skilled practitioners. Need good supervision | High skilled practitioners |
| Cost range | Very high to Medium | High to Medium | Medium to Low | Medium to Low | High to Medium |
| Timescale | Very high to Medium | Medium to Low | High | High to Medium | Medium to Low |
Methods Toolbox > Strengths and weaknesses of key impact assessment methods
Methods Toolbox
Strengths and weaknesses of key impact assessment methods
Latest Publications
Vulnerability and poverty in Bangladesh
This study estimates ex ante poverty and vulnerability of households in Bangladesh using Household...
Parallel realities: exploring poverty dynamics using mixed methods in rural Bangladesh
In this paper we explore the implications of using two different methodological approaches to study...