Defining and measuring social disadvantages can be a complex task for program evaluators. Here are five key points on how program evaluators approach the definition and measurement of social disadvantages:
Conceptual framework: Program evaluators often rely on established conceptual frameworks to define and understand social disadvantages. These frameworks may draw from sociological, economic, or multidimensional approaches to identify key dimensions and indicators of disadvantage. Examples include the capability approach, social exclusion frameworks, and intersectionality theory. These frameworks help evaluators define the scope and boundaries of social disadvantages and guide the selection of relevant measurement indicators.
Multiple dimensions: Social disadvantages are multifaceted and encompass various dimensions, such as income, education, health, housing, employment, and access to services. Evaluators consider a range of indicators within each dimension to capture the complexity of social disadvantages. For example, income indicators may include poverty rates, income inequality measures, or access to social protection programs.
Contextual relevance: Evaluators recognize the importance of context in defining and measuring social disadvantages. They consider the specific socio-cultural, economic, and political context in which the program operates. This ensures that the measurement indicators align with the local context and capture the unique challenges and disparities faced by disadvantaged groups within that context.
Comparative analysis: Evaluators often employ comparative analysis to measure social disadvantages. They compare outcomes and indicators of disadvantaged groups with those of more advantaged groups or the general population. This allows for identifying disparities, inequities, and gaps in social outcomes, highlighting the relative disadvantage experienced by specific groups.
Mixed methods and data sources: Evaluators use a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods and data sources to measure social disadvantages. Quantitative data sources, such as surveys, administrative data, or national statistics, provide numerical measures and indicators. Qualitative data, including interviews, focus groups, or case studies, help capture the lived experiences, narratives, and perspectives of disadvantaged individuals and communities. Integrating multiple data sources enhances the richness and validity of the measurement process.
