La ToC è la teoria del cambiamento. Ma che cos’è il cambiamento?

Journal title RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione
Author/s Nicoletta Stame
Publishing Year 2024 Issue 2023/87 Language Italian
Pages 21 P. 130-150 File size 356 KB
DOI 10.3280/RIV2023-087008
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Since the Theory of Change became a widespread tool, both in programs and in evaluation, evaluators have been more concerned about what a theory looks like rather than about the nature of change. Change can take place in different ways: either according to planned directions or in unexpected, even surprising, ways. This article proposes to take a different perspective: beyond an evaluation demand for the explanation/verification of the intended work- ing of a program it is suggested to demand how change can happen, possibly even in a surprising way, that might challenge rigid hypotheses and models. To this purpose, it suggests to grasp the elaboration of “possibilism”, origi- nated by Colorni, theorized by Hirschman and practiced by Tendler. Such an approach may suit those evaluators who advocate that evaluation challenge a ToC’s assumptions, and that new hypotheses, based on the experience of an intervention implementation, be developed in an iterative way.

Keywords: Theory of change; Change, explanation; Understanding; Possi- bilism; Unintended consequences.

  1. Andrews, M., Pritchett, L.,Woolcock (2017) Building State Capability, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  2. Adrian, M., H., Koleros D., Tyrrell T. (2023). Theories of Change in Reality: Strengths, Limitations and Future Directions, Routledge, New York.
  3. Befani, B., Mayne, J. (2014) Process Tracing and Contribution Analysis: A Combined Approach to Generative Causal Inference for Impact Evaluation, IDS Bulletin, 45(6).
  4. Chen, H., Rossi, P. (1989) “Issues in the Theory-driven Perspective”, Evaluation and Pro- gram Planning (12)4: 299–306.
  5. Colorni, E. (2016a). Microfondamenta, Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli. Colorni, E. ( 2016b). La scoperta del possibile, Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli. Colorni, E. (2018). L’ultimo anno, Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli.
  6. Colorni, E. (2020). La ‘Malattia filosofica’ e altri scritti, Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli.
  7. Connell, J.P., Kubisch, A.C. (2007). “L’approccio della teoria del cambiamento applicato alla valutazione delle iniziative integrate di comunità: stato dell’arte, prospettive e problemi” in Stame, cur., Classici della valutazione, Franco Angeli, Milano Connell, J.P., Kubisch, A.C., Schorr, L.B., Weiss, C.H. (cur.) (1995). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods, and contexts. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
  8. Dahlen-Larsen, P. (2018). “Theory-based evaluation meets ambiguity: the role of Janus Variables”, American Journal of Evaluation, 39 (1): 6-23.
  9. Forss, K. (2021). “From measuring impact to understanding change”, in Forss K., Lind- qvist I. & mc Gillivray, M. Long term perspectives in evaluation, Routledge, New York.
  10. Forss, K., Lindqvist, I., mc Gillivray, M. (2021). Long term perspectives in evaluation, Routledge, New York.
  11. Funnell, S., Rogers, P. (2011). Purposeful Program Theory. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
  12. Hirschman, A.O. (1967). Development Projects Observed, The Brookings Institution, Washington DC.
  13. Hirschman, A.O. (1971). A bias for Hope, Yale University Press, New Haven Conn.
  14. Hirschman, A.O. (1988a). “Political economics e possibilismo” in Come complicare l’economia, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  15. Hirschman, A.O. (1988b). “Ostacoli allo sviluppo: una classificazione e un atto di quasi- vanificazione”, in Come complicare l’economia, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  16. Hirschman, A.O. (1990a). “ Introduzione a ‘Journeys’ “ in Come far passare le riforme, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  17. Hirschman, A.O. (1990b). “La ricerca di paradigmi come ostacolo alla comprensione”, in Come far passare le riforme, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  18. Hirschman, A.O. (1990c). “Sottosviluppo, ostacoli alla percezione del cambiamento e lea- dership” in Come far passare le riforme, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  19. Kogen, L. (2018). “What have we learned? Questioning accountability in aid policy and practice”, Evaluation 24(1): 98–112.
  20. Mayne, J. (2017). “Theory of Change Analysis: Building Robust Theories of Change”,
  21. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 32 (2): 155–173.
  22. Mayne, J. (2021). “Contribution Analysis and the Long-term Perspective: Challenges and Opportunities”, in Forss K., Lindqvist I. & mc Gillivray, M. Long term perspectives in eval- uation, Routledge, New York.
  23. Merton R.K. (1936) “The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action”,
  24. American Sociological Review, 1 (6): 894-904.
  25. Pawson, R. (2013). The science of evaluation, Sage, London.
  26. Stame, N. (2004). “Theory based evaluation and types of complexity”, Evaluation, 10(1): 58–76.
  27. Stame, N. (2022a). “Program, complexity, and system when evaluating sustainable devel- opment”, Evaluation, 28(1): 58–71.
  28. Stame, N. (2022b). Tra possibilismo e valutazione: Albert Hirschman e Judith Tendler, Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli.
  29. Stame, N. (2024). “Taking side-effects seriously”, in Festschrift in Honor of Evert Ve- dung, Stockholm.
  30. Stame, N., Lo Presti, V. (2015). “Positive Thinking and Learning from Evaluation”, in Bohni-Nielsen, S., Turksema, R., P., van der Knaap, Evaluation and Success, New Brunswick NJ, Transactions Publishers.
  31. Stern, E., Stame, N., Mayne J., Forss K., Davies R., Befani B. (2012). Broadening the range of designs and methods for impact evaluation. DFID Working Paper No. 38, London
  32. Stern, E. (2023). “Editorial”, Evaluation 29 (2). Tendler, J. (1992). Progetti ed effetti, Liguori, Napoli.
  33. Tendler, J. (2018). Beautiful pages by Judith Tendler, IDE, Roma. UNICEF (2021). Theory of Change, UNICEF Strategic Plan, 2022–2025.
  34. Van den Berg, R., Hawkins, P., Stame, N. (cur.) (2022). Ethics for Evaluation. Beyond “Doing no Harm” to “Tackling Bad”and “Doing Good”, Routledge, NY.
  35. Valters, C. (2014). Theories of Change in International Development: Communication, Learning, or Accountability? JSRP, Asia Foundation, Paper 17.
  36. Weiss, C. H. (1972). Evaluation Research. Mehods for Assessing Program Effectiveness, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs NJ.
  37. Weiss, C.H. (2007). “La valutazione basata sulla teoria. Passato, presente e futuro”, in Stame N., cur., Classici della Valutazione, Milano, Franco Angeli.
  38. Wilson-Grau, R., Britt, H. (2012). Outcome Harvesting, Ford Foundation, Cairo. Woolcock, M. (2012). “Using case studies to explore the external validity of ‘complex’ development interventions”, Evaluation, 19 (3): 229-248.
  39. Woolcock, M. (2023). International development. Navigating Humanity’s greatest chal- lenge, Polity Press, Cambridge.

Nicoletta Stame, La ToC è la teoria del cambiamento. Ma che cos’è il cambiamento? in "RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione" 87/2023, pp 130-150, DOI: 10.3280/RIV2023-087008