The #EvalforEarth discussion comes at exactly the right time. Many evaluations still tell us how projects performed yesterday, while leaders increasingly need evidence on how systems can survive tomorrow.
Across food security, agriculture, climate resilience, and governance, one lesson repeatedly emerges: outcomes are shaped less by individual projects than by the systems in which they operate—institutions, incentives, partnerships, learning cultures, and political ownership. Strong projects often fail inside weak systems; modest interventions can succeed when embedded in adaptive and trusted institutions.
This is why retrospective evaluation alone is no longer enough. It may accurately assess past outputs and efficiency, yet miss the critical forward-looking questions:
• Will this programme remain relevant under climate shocks or market volatility? • Can institutions adapt when assumptions change? • Are partnerships resilient under stress? • Will gains endure after funding ends?
Strategic foresight offers practical tools to strengthen evaluation: horizon scanning, scenario planning, Three Horizons, and causal layered analysis. These methods can help evaluators move from static judgement to dynamic learning.
Three practical entry points:
Design stage – stress-test theories of change against multiple future scenarios.
Evaluation stage – assess adaptive capacity, institutional resilience, and system coherence—not only current performance.
Recommendation stage – offer options robust across plausible futures, not just ideal conditions.
Perhaps we also need to reinterpret OECD-DAC criteria through a future lens: Relevance = future fit Sustainability = resilience under shocks Impact = contribution to long-term system transformation
The future of evaluation is not abandoning hindsight. It is combining hindsight, insight, and foresight so evidence can guide action in an uncertain world.
RE: From Hindsight to Foresight: How Evaluation Can Become Future-Informed
Nepal
Gana Pati Ojha
Community of Evaluators
Posted on 24/04/2026
The #EvalforEarth discussion comes at exactly the right time. Many evaluations still tell us how projects performed yesterday, while leaders increasingly need evidence on how systems can survive tomorrow.
Across food security, agriculture, climate resilience, and governance, one lesson repeatedly emerges: outcomes are shaped less by individual projects than by the systems in which they operate—institutions, incentives, partnerships, learning cultures, and political ownership. Strong projects often fail inside weak systems; modest interventions can succeed when embedded in adaptive and trusted institutions.
This is why retrospective evaluation alone is no longer enough. It may accurately assess past outputs and efficiency, yet miss the critical forward-looking questions:
• Will this programme remain relevant under climate shocks or market volatility?
• Can institutions adapt when assumptions change?
• Are partnerships resilient under stress?
• Will gains endure after funding ends?
Strategic foresight offers practical tools to strengthen evaluation: horizon scanning, scenario planning, Three Horizons, and causal layered analysis. These methods can help evaluators move from static judgement to dynamic learning.
Three practical entry points:
Perhaps we also need to reinterpret OECD-DAC criteria through a future lens:
Relevance = future fit
Sustainability = resilience under shocks
Impact = contribution to long-term system transformation
The future of evaluation is not abandoning hindsight. It is combining hindsight, insight, and foresight so evidence can guide action in an uncertain world.