Click here to download

Evaluation and Cade Study Research: a positive evaluative case study of social infrastructure in Palermo
Journal Title: RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione 
Author/s: Veronica Lo Presti, Maria Dentale, Elvira Celardi 
Year:  2018 Issue: 71-72 Language: Italian 
Pages:  22 Pg. 9-30 FullText PDF:  542 KB
DOI:  10.3280/RIV2018-071002
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


The Case Study Research on the territory of Palermo has allowed to identify "constellations of circumstances that work" (Tendler, 1992) beyond the territorial boundaries initially indicated by the client. The case study highlighted how a new model of collaboration between profit, non-profit and public was developed in the Ballarò district, which was reported by several interviewees as an example of success. Involving local actors in the discovery of what worked, has brought to the fore the mechanisms that (interacting with particular contextual factors) have contributed to increase the infrastructures and consequently the social cohesion in the territory. The case study within a theoryoriented evaluation, not centered on the relationship between means and ends, allowed us to observe the complexity of the causal relationships that have been activated in the context and to identify strategies of action, elaborated on the experience of the actors. premises, which otherwise would have gone unnoticed in the eyes of the client.
Keywords: Case Study; Mixed Methods; Positive Thinking; Social Infrastructure.

  1. Amaturo E., Punziano G. (2016), I Mixed methods nella ricerca sociale, Carocci Editore, Roma.
  2. Bäckstrand K. (2006). Multi‐stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness - European Environment, 2006 - Wiley Online Library.
  3. Bagnasco A., Piselli F., Pizzorno A., Trigilia C. (2001). Capitale Sociale. Istruzioni per l’uso. Il Mulino, Bologna.
  4. Baldascino, M., Mosca, M. (2012). Sussidiarietà orizzontale, welfare comunitario ed economia sociale. Jovene, Napoli.
  5. Befani, B. e Mayne, J. (2014). “Process Tracing and Contribution Analysis: A Combined Approach to Generative Causal Inference for Impact Evaluation”, . IDS Bulletin Volume, 45 Number 6, November 2014.
  6. Benasso, S., Palumbo, M., Pandolfini, V. (2019). “Narrating Cases: a Storytelling Approach to Case Study Analysis in the Field of Lifelong Learning Policies”. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 11(2), 83-108.
  7. Bonacich P. (1987). “Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures”. American Journal of Sociology 92(5): 1170-1182.
  8. Borgomeo, C. (2013). L’equivoco del Sud. Sviluppo e coesione sociale. Editori Laterza, Bari.
  9. Carrington, P. J., Scott, J., Wasserman, S. (2005). Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis, Cambridge University Press.
  10. Cerea S. (2015), I servizi per la prima infanzia nella prospettiva dell’investimento sociale, in Ascoli, Ranci, Sgritta “Investire nel sociale. La difficile innovazione del welfare italiano”; il Mulino, Bologna.
  11. Cross, J. E., Dickmann, E., Newman-Gonchar, R., & Fagan, J. M. (2009). “Using Mixed-Method Design and Network Analysis to Measure Development of Interagency Collaboration”. American Journal of Evaluation 30(3): 310-329.
  12. Donati P., Colozzi I. (2006), Terzo Settore e Valorizzazione del Capitale Sociale in Italia: Luoghi e Attori. FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  13. Donati P., L'analisi sociologica del terzo settore: introdurre la distinzione relazionale terzo settore/privato sociale, in G. Rossi (a cura di), Terzo settore, stato e mercato nella trasformazione delle politiche sociali in Europa, FrancoAngeli, Milano, 1997, pp. 255-295.
  14. Donati P., Colozzi, I. a cura di (2004), Il privato sociale che emerge: realtà e dilemmi, il Mulino, Bologna. Ferrucci F. (2010), Capitale Sociale e Partnership tra Pubblico, Privato e Terzo Settore, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  15. Freeman, L. C. (1979). “Centrality in social networks: I. Conceptual clarification”. Social Networks 1: 215-239.
  16. Hemerijck A. (2013); Changing Welfare State, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  17. Hemmati M. (2000). Multi-stakeholder Processes for Governance and Sustainability Beyond Deadlock and Conflict Earthscan Publications Ltd, London and New York.
  18. Istat (2017). Safety and state of degradation of cities and their suburbs; Parliamentary Hearing.
  19. Lanzara G.F. (2001). “The logic of bricolage. Comments on the "minor" design practices. Network of Engineering and Human Sciences”. Working Paper 2001(04).
  20. Moulaert F., MacCallum D., Hillier J. e Vicari Haddock S., 2009. "Social Innovation and Territorial Development", Ashgate Publishing Company, Surrey, England.
  21. Mutti A., (1998). Capitale sociale e sviluppo, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  22. Pawson, D. R., Tilley, P. N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation .UK: Sage Publications Ltd.
  23. Rogers, P. (2009) “Using Programme Theory to Evaluate Complicated and Complex Aspects of Interventions”. Evaluation, Vol 14(1): 29–48.
  24. Putnam R.D. (2000). Bowling Alone, The collapse and revival of American community, Simon and Schuster, New York (trad. it.: Capitale sociale e individualismo. Crisi e rinascita della cultura civica in America, il Mulino, Bologna, 2004).
  25. Stame, N. (1998), L’esperienza della valutazione. Edizioni Seam, Roma.- (2016). Valutazione pluralista. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  26. Stame, N., Lo Presti V., (2015). Positive Thinking and Learning from Evaluation, in Bohni-Nielsen S., Turksema R. and van del Knaap P. (ed.), Evaluation and Success, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ.
  27. Stake, R. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Sage: Thousand Oaks.
  28. Stake R. (2005). Qualitative Case Studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications.
  29. Tagle, L., Celano, S., Bonaduce, A., Gaeta, G.L., Spagnolo, F. (2016). Valutare dal locale per il locale. Un approccio valutativo per rafforzare le strategie locali e stimolare il dialogo sugli esiti delle politiche pubbliche. Rapporto di ricerca. -- http://valutazioneinvestimenti.formez.it/sites/all/files/rapporto_progetto_pilota_reves_06_03_2017.pdf.
  30. Tendler J. (1993), Progetti ed effetti, Liguori, Napoli.
  31. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  32. Weiss, C. 2007. “La valutazione basata sulla teoria. Passato, presente e futuro”, in Stame, N., a cura di., Classici della Valutazione, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  33. Yin R.K. (2005), Lo studio di caso nella ricerca scientifica, Armando Editore, Roma.
  34. Yin R. K. (2014). Case Study Research. Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.
  35. Yin R. K. (2018). Case Study Research. Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.

Veronica Lo Presti, Maria Dentale, Elvira Celardi, Evaluation and Cade Study Research: a positive evaluative case study of social infrastructure in Palermo in "RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione" 71-72/2018, pp. 9-30, DOI:10.3280/RIV2018-071002

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content