How to assess if markets work better for the poor: Experiences from the Katalyst Project in Bangladesh

Harald Bekkers; Alexandra Miehlbradt; Peter Roggekamp

doi:10.3362/1755-1986.2008.012

How to assess if markets work better for the poor: Experiences from the Katalyst Project in Bangladesh

Harald Bekkers, Alexandra Miehlbradt, Peter Roggekamp

There is increasing demand for reports on the results and poverty impacts of private sector development projects. This article suggests that projects can respond to this demand through internal monitoring systems that provide both useful information for project management and estimated impacts on enterprises and poverty reduction. The article discusses the case of Katalyst, an M4P project in Bangladesh that has installed an internal monitoring system that uses a mid-range approach to impact assessment. Katalyst's impact assessment in the pond fish sector is presented, giving the details of what was measured, how it was measured, the conclusions drawn and follow up decisions made. Katalyst's overall impact monitoring system is then presented with an emphasis on how Katalyst balances accuracy with simplicity. The article concludes with Katalyst's perspective on how this system has been useful both for internal management and external reporting.

AusAid (Australian Agency for International Development) (2005) ‘AusGuideline 3.3 The Logical Framework Approach’, Commonwealth of Australia. Bangladesh DOF (Department of Fisheries) (2005) Annual Statistics, Department of Fisheries, Dhaka.

Bangladesh DOF (2006) Annual Statistics, Department of Fisheries, Dhaka.

Bangladesh DOF (2007) Annual Statistics, Department of Fisheries, Dhaka.

Copestake, J. (2004) ‘Social performance assessment of microfinance — costeffective or costly indulgence?’, Small Enterprise Development 15 (3): 11-17.

de Ruyter de Wildt, M. (2007) ‘Accelerating Growth in the Pond Fish Sector’, Springfield Centre for Business in Development for Katalyst, Katalyst, Dhaka.

EES (European Evaluation Society) (2007) ‘EES statement: The importance of a methodologically diverse approach to impact evaluation - specifically with respect to development aid and development intervention’, EES Secretariat, Nijkerk.

Hulme, D. (2000) ‘Impact assessment methodologies for microfinance: Theory, experience and better practice’, World Development 28 (1): 79-98.

Kirkpatrick, C. and Hulme, D. (2001) ‘Basic Impact Assessment at Project Level’, Department for International Development, London.

Springfield Centre (forthcoming) ‘The Making Markets Work for the Poor (M4P) Approach’, for Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) and UK Department for International Development (DFID), Springfield Centre for Business in Development Ltd,.

Tanburn, J. (2008) The 2008 Reader on Private Sector Development: Measuring and Reporting on Results, International Training Centre of the International Labour Organization, Turin.