ABSTRACT

Evaluation as qualified monitoring is usually a routinized, continuous feature of public decision–making systems. As impact assessment, evaluation is frequently commissioned on specific occasions. Whether permanent or periodic, monitoring or impact assessing, however, evaluation is performed for either accountability, intervention improvement or basic knowledge advancement. Accountability belongs to a wider class of phenomena, intimated by dual concepts like represented—representative, master—servant, superior—subordinate, principal—executive, mistress—maid, farmer— farmhand, employer—employee, and boss—underling. In accountability evaluation, the perspective of political officials is usually held out as fundamental. The provision of basic knowledge is not the major task of evaluation; basic knowledge is subordinated under accountability and improvement. The provision of basic knowledge is not the major task of evaluation; basic knowledge is subordinated under accountability and improvement. Evaluation always takes place in action settings, it is usually permeated with game—oriented considerations, strategic purposes. In addition, the mixture of bona fide substantive aims and covert strategic purposes enhances the fascination with evaluation.