• About us
  • GSDRC Publications
  • Research Helpdesk
  • E-Bulletin
  • Privacy policy

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
    • Public sector management
    • Security & justice
    • Service delivery
    • State-society relations
  • Social Development
    • Gender
    • Inequalities & exclusion
    • Social protection
    • Poverty & wellbeing
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
    • Recovery & reconstruction
    • Refugees/IDPs
    • Risk & resilience
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
    • Peacebuilding
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
    • Migration & diaspora
    • Population growth
    • Urbanisation
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
    • Institutions & social norms
    • PEA / Thinking & working politically
    • Results-based approaches
    • Theories of change
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
    • Multilateral aid
    • Private sector partnerships
    • Technical assistance
  • M&E
    • Indicators
    • Learning
    • M&E approaches
Home»GSDRC Publications»Problem-driven iterative approaches and wider governance reform

Problem-driven iterative approaches and wider governance reform

Helpdesk Report
  • Sumedh Rao
March 2014

Question

Identify evidence which suggests that problem-driven, iterative approaches to public sector reform can deliver more substantial, wider, long-term governance reform.

Summary

A problem-driven, iterative approach to institutional reform involves (i) solving defined performance problems through (ii) creating an environment amenable to experimentation, (iii) creating tight feedback loops, and (iv) engaging a broad set of actors. Such an approach has recently been termed as PDIA (problem-driven iterative adaptation), with analysis suggesting that successful institutional reforms have mostly followed PDIA principles, though these may not have been acknowledged explicitly. The PDIA approach is based on solving a particular performance problem in a specific process. It is not clear whether actors who have undertaken PDIA-type institutional reform in one instance will be better able to undertake reform in another instance, or whether they can better address more significant governance reforms (e.g. overhauling civil service or public financial management systems). This helpdesk research report looks to identify material which suggests a link.

Research for this report could not find literature which specifically explores the impact of the adoption of PDIA approach in one instance on substantial, wider, long-term governance reform. Though there are now projects that explicitly include PDIA principles, these projects have not yet been evaluated. There is therefore no conclusive evidence that PDIA is more (or less) conducive to wider governance reforms. However, from past experiences and case studies, it may be possible to infer whether PDIA-type approaches have led, or could lead to, wider governance reform.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Related Content

Public service reform
E-Learning
2015
birminghamids hcri

gro.crdsg@seiriuqne Feedback Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2023; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2023; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2023
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2023; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2023; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2023