1,720,971 research outputs found
Evaluation of the project “Developing a Public‐ Private Partnerships (PPP) and Infrastructure Financing Network in Asia and the Pacific”
Full text linkCommissioned by Trade, Investment & Innovation, ESCAPThe project, “Developing a Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) and Infrastructure Financing Network in Asia and the Pacific”, sought to establish a network of public authorities, financiers, and market participants in Asia and the Pacific who are currently implementing or planning to implement PPP. By enhancing countries' capacity to effectively use public-private partnerships to bring in private sector investment for public infrastructure projects, the network aimed to boost infrastructure development and financing in the region.ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... I
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................... IV
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... V
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ................................................................................................................ 2
2.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 LINK TO THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS (SDGS) ........................................................................................ 2
2.3 PROJECT THEORY OF CHANGE ............................................................................................................................... 3
2.4 PROJECT STRATEGIES .......................................................................................................................................... 5
2.5 INNOVATIVE ELEMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 5
2.6 BENEFICIARIES, TARGET COUNTRIES AND KEY PARTNERS............................................................................................. 5
2.7 RESOURCES ...................................................................................................................................................... 5
EVALUATION OBJECTIVES, SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ......................................................................... 6
3.1 EVALUATION OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................................................... 6
3.2 EVALUATION SCOPE ........................................................................................................................................... 6
3.3 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................ 7
EVALUATION FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................... 10
4.1 DESIGN.......................................................................................................................................................... 10
4.2 RELEVANCE .................................................................................................................................................... 11
4.3 EFFICIENCY ..................................................................................................................................................... 15
4.4 EFFECTIVENESS................................................................................................................................................ 18
4.5. PARTNERSHIPS AND COHERENCE ........................................................................................................................ 23
4.6. SUSTAINABILITY .............................................................................................................................................. 25
4.7. GENDER, HUMAN RIGHTS MAINSTREAMING AND DISABILITY INCLUSION ..................................................................... 27
CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................................... 30
LESSONS LEARNED/GOOD PRACTICES ................................................................................................... 32
RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 33
ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................................... 34
ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE.............................................................................................................................. 34
ANNEX 2: DOCUMENTS REVIEWED........................................................................................................................... 41
ANNEX 3: LIST OF INTERVIEWEES ............................................................................................................................. 43
ANNEX 4: DATA COLLECTION TOOLS ........................................................................................................................ 44
ANNEX 5: RESULTS/ LOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE EVALUATION ............................................................................ 46
ANNEX 6: EVALUATION FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, LESSONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS (SUMMARY TABLE) .............. 47</p
Evaluation of the ESCAP Subprogramme 2: Trade, Investment and Innovation
Full text linkCommissioned by Trade, Investment and Innovation Department, ESCAPESCAP Subprogramme 2 (SP2) “Trade and investment” is vested within the Trade, Investment and Innovation Division (TIID), with support from the Asian and Pacific Centre for Transfer of Technology and the Centre for Sustainable Agricultural Mechanization. TIID is organized in three sections: (1) Trade Policy and Facilitation, (2) Investment and Enterprise Development, and (3) Technology and Innovation. The overall impact objective sought by the subprogramme is “inclusive and sustainable trade, investment and innovation in Asia and the Pacific,” which is expected to help member States in the region achieve relevant SDGs. The purpose of this evaluation was to provide ESCAP, including its Trade, Investment and Innovation Division, “actionable information to enhance the impact of the subprogramme and value of the work carried out by TIID”. The evaluation is formative in nature and intends to support organizational learning and decision-making towards informing formulation of future programme of work and delivery modalities. The evaluation followed a mixedmethods, inclusive and participatory approach with adequate triangulation and counterfactuals to arrive at credible, reliable, and unbiased findings.</p
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
