Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
O
To communicate to stakeholders what the provisions of the plan are for, and
how they will contribute to the achievement of the identified outcomes.
O
As a basis for evaluating the progressive implementation of the plan, to
inform corrective action as needed.
O
As a basis for triggering or informing a full-scale revision of the plan.
Unfortunately few water resource plans have explicitly stated logic models. This
does not mean there is no logic in the plan. It rather means that the logic that was
used to prepare the plan is scattered through the text of the plan and associated
documents, or is not documented at all. It also means that there may be gaps or
weaknesses in the plan logic that were never identified and performance indicators
are more likely to be poorly designed. A common problem is plan indicators that
are a 'grab bag' of disparate measures that are not systematically related to the
plan logic, and prove to be of limited value for evaluation (GWP 2012).
Logic models can be expressed in a number of ways. Outcomes can be
expressed in a hierarchy with broad outcomes at the end and one or more
layers of intermediate outcomes. Figure 3.2 shows one way that logic models
can be set out.
There can in reality be any number of levels of outcomes rather than just
three, depending on how broadly the final outcome is defined, and how many
intermediate levels are identified. For example, you could have the chain of
outcomes broken into five levels as shown in Figure 3.3.
Considering this example, it is evident that the broader the outcome the
more the achievement of the outcome is dependent on more than the single
items listed. For example accessibility to groundwater also depends on there
being appropriate infrastructure, and increased lifespan is also affected by
public health measures. Some of the factors may be within the scope of the
water resource plan, but many will not. The Logical Framework Approach
explicitly documents significant externalities under the heading of 'assump-
tions and risks' (see Table 3.1) to make clearer the limitations of what can
be expected from the programme or plan. It can be convenient to truncate
Figure 3.2
Generic logic model
Figure 3.3
Example chain of outcomes
