While it might be self-evident that global development’s challenges require integrated solutions, what is the state of the evidence base to prove that “integrated development” is more effective than sector-specific programming?
Many organizations are looking for ways to better integrate their program areas, so that efforts in natural resource management and efforts in health or education or governance can be mutually reinforcing. But as development organizations strive to implement programs at those intersections, and as they look for funding opportunities, so must they demonstrate that an integrated approach gives them a competitive edge. That takes data and evidence.
“I think the best way to characterize the integrated development evidence base right now is spotty and mixed,” said FHI 360 Technical Officer Tessa Ahner-McHaffie in a recent Devex Google Hangout titled “Evidence, Impact and Innovation within Integrated Development.”
This story is forDevex Promembers
Unlock this story now with a 15-day free trial of Devex Pro.
With a Devex Pro subscription you'll get access to deeper analysis and exclusive insights from our reporters and analysts.
Start my free trialRequest a group subscriptionAbout the author
Michael Igoe@AlterIgoe
Michael Igoe is a Senior Reporter with Devex, based in Washington, D.C. He covers U.S. foreign aid, global health, climate change, and development finance. Prior to joining Devex, Michael researched water management and climate change adaptation in post-Soviet Central Asia, where he also wrote for EurasiaNet. Michael earned his bachelor's degree from Bowdoin College, where he majored in Russian, and his master’s degree from the University of Montana, where he studied international conservation and development.
