Managing evaluation risks

Over the years, I have submitted hundreds of human research ethics applications. I have noted the increasing demand for careful consideration of ethical issues. In Australia, guidelines for ethical research and related application forms require clear strategies for managing risk and distress and where benefits and risks must be articulated (National Health and Medical ResearchCouncil Australian Research Council Universities Australia, 2023) and where impacts and risks for First Nations people are carefully considered (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2020). The AES ethical guidelines (Australasian Evaluation Society Inc., 2013) also take risk and benefit seriously. In this issue of the Evaluation Journal of Australasia, I have chosen to focus on aspects of risk that are raised by each author. Despite these general guidelines, the literature on ‘risk management’ and ‘risk mitigation’ is scant. For example, the recently published Routledge Handbook of Human Research Ethics and Integrity in Australia (Smyth et al., 2024) mentions those two phrases no more than five times. Another recent book, The Politics and Ethics of Representation in Qualitative Research, has one chapter that comprehensively addresses risk (Söderman, 2022). Ethics for Evaluation (Van den Berg et al., 2021) acknowledges risk in evaluation, particularly in the context of fragility, context and violence (Aronsson & Hassnain, 2021), but does not unpack what a risk mitigation strategy for evaluation in this context looks like. My brief scan of the literature suggests that while research and evaluation standards talk about risk (and benefit), a discussion of risk management and mitigation strategies in evaluation practice are seldom discussed. And yet, particularly for those evaluating in fields where equity, rights and justice are concerns or where minorities and marginalised people are participants, this topic should be at the forefront of our minds. Even in less contentious fields of study where reputational, political and service delivery risks are at stake, as evaluators, we should have strategies in place to mitigate and manage the risks that we, our participants and our clients face as a result of evaluation.