Cover Image
close this bookIllicit Drugs and the Development Assistance Programme - Strategy paper (DFID, 1999, 18 p.)
View the document(introduction...)
View the documentSummary
View the documentBackground and purpose
View the documentLegal and policy basis
View the documentDrugs and poverty
Open this folder and view contentsThe response
View the documentEvaluation and performance measurement (bilateral activities)
View the documentCo-ordination within Whitehall
View the documentAnnex : The European Union's support for combating drugs

Evaluation and performance measurement (bilateral activities)

39 The main critical success factors for anti-drugs programmes - not unique to those activities - are: strong recipient government commitment to tackling the problems; close attention to institutional factors; coherence of donor efforts, especially in relation to conditionality; and local participation. The limited evaluation material available to DFID suggests that its interventions in the field of drugs can be successful, though the evidence should be treated cautiously. The Bryan/Mansfield Study of Training in Drug Law Enforcement (March 1995) showed that it is possible to run a well-targeted training programme that enhances the capacity of anti-drugs units to do an effective job. It did not, however, show that drugs supply in the countries studied had in any way diminished as a result, much less that poor farmers had become any better off. It is doubtful, therefore, whether running training programmes of this kind, with no clear anti-poverty benefits, would any longer be appropriate for DFID.

40 When DFID does get involved in drugs activities, we need to ensure that our interventions have clearly defined purposes and carefully chosen indicators. This has not always been done in the past, e.g. the Bryan/Mansfield report notes that 'the quality of the available statistics did not enable the hypothesis of a relationship between training and increased success in in-country enforcement to be tested'. This clearly represents design weakness. DFID's new drugs strategy will need to focus unambiguously on wider outcomes (especially poverty reduction) and the means necessary to assess them. We may need to develop better policy indicators. Indicators should distinguish between the impact of any anti-drugs intervention on the poor, and on the drugs economy more generally. But the possible range and the interrelated nature of indicators may lead to an over-complex picture. It would be useful to work with UNDCP (and others) to identify which indicators have been, or may be, worthwhile and effective in measuring performance against DFID objectives.