A critical analysis of current methods of public sector project and programme evaluation in regeneration

Abstract

This thesis presents a critique of public sector regeneration project and programme evaluation and develops an alternative and original evaluation framework. The framework has been successfully applied, in part, to a major national evaluation, demonstrating both its feasibility and significant added value. An important priority for the UK Government is regenerating areas of concentrated deprivation. The thesis provides, in Chapter 2, a review of the inter-linked problems facing such areas. It goes on to consider the nature and characteristics of the regeneration policies and programmes that have been developed to tackle these problems - noting their complex and multi-domain nature. The thesis demonstrates, in Chapter 3, that the public sector intervenes in the allocation of resources to secure certain societal objectives including, in particular, economic efficiency and equity. The thesis argues that regeneration programmes will often seek to meet a number of these objectives to varying degrees. If the public sector is to ensure that net social benefits of regeneration are maximised effective evaluation is critical. The thesis shows that the evaluation of regeneration programmes is extremely complex. It proposes in Chapter 4, a typology of evaluation methodologies and techniques. The thesis reviews current guidance on evaluations and identifies a number of key issues. The thesis presents a critique of various, recent evaluations of regeneration programmes and identifies significant weaknesses in them and their coverage of the key evaluation issues. It argues that complex regeneration programmes need a multi-faceted framework to evaluate them. The approach proposed is novel and combines multi-criteria value for money, cost benefit account and what works analyses, using both macro (top-down) and micro (bottom-up) approaches. Overall, the thesis sets out the results of distinctive and original research into the evaluation of regeneration projects and programmes. The alternative framework proposed represents a significant improvement on past practice.