Testing the claim of greater project effectiveness: a systematic review of comparative evaluations of locally led development

Abstract

In the sphere of foreign assistance, there is a growing push for locally led development (LLD). One common argument is that LLD approaches are more effective than traditional approaches for producing project outcomes. However, the empirical evidence for the claim of greater project effectiveness remains unexamined. This systematic review asks ‘what is the empirical evidence for the relative effectiveness of LLD approaches compared to traditional, or less locally led, approaches?’ We include studies that measure the comparative effectiveness of an LLD approach to a traditional or less LLD approach. We exclude studies that only compare an LLD approach to the status quo or doing nothing. Our index and website search (May 2024) plus snowball search yielded 1,749 hits. Ten studies passed all screening criteria. Study findings are mixed. Our main findings are: there is limited evidence on the relative effectiveness of LLD approaches compared to other development interventions; there is no evidence on relative cost effectiveness; and findings are mixed on the relative effectiveness of the same intervention depending on context and outcomes measured. We conclude that policy advocates should refrain from setting expectations about relative cost effectiveness and focus on other reasons for locally led development.Registration available OSF https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/E9FH3

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.