Organisations that invest in development programmes are increasingly asked to demonstrate the concrete results of their investments and many organisations are now rethinking their approaches to Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PME). Within the DPRN framework, HIVA Research Institute for Labour and Society of the Catholic University Leuven, PSO Capacity Building in Developing Countries, the Flemish Office for Development Cooperation and Technical Assistance (VVOB) and Vredeseilanden/VECO jointly explored the relevance of various PME approaches. The aim was to generate practical lessons for future PME policy and practice.

A review of PME policies within the international cooperation sector in Belgium, the Netherlands, the European Commission and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows the need to move towards more methodological diversity.

There is a danger of the debate on PME approaches turning into an unhelpful discussion between proponents and opponents of the logical framework approach. It is more helpful to explore the advantages and disadvantages of different PME methods based on what works for whom in which context. The challenge is to identify how elements from different approaches can complement each other and lead to more effective PME .

The process activities generated several recommendations on the use of complementary PME approaches for policymakers and NGOs.

The DPRN process has successfully linked up with a number of similar initiatives. The dialogue about alternative complexity-oriented PME approaches will continue through several follow-up activities.