L'évaluation de la coopération Sud-Sud et triangulaire: Réflexions tirées d'un dialogue mondial

Yet, as SSTC grows in importance, the need for credible and systematic evaluation becomes more urgent. Evaluations help move SSTC beyond political rhetoric or diplomatic formalities by ensuring that such cooperation yields tangible and inclusive development outcomes. It also supports the institutionalization of SSTC as a serious and results-driven development modality, capable of influencing national and global policy agendas. This way, the evaluation of SSTC strengthens mutual accountability by demonstrating results to all partners. It also promotes learning, allowing countries and institutions to identify what works and why. 

Challenges in Evaluating SSTC

Evaluating SSTC comes with its own set of challenges. It must address the conventional common difficulties found in traditional evaluations while also capturing SSTC’s distinct principles—solidarity, mutual benefit, and national ownership—in ways that ensure these values are not merely symbolic but are also meaningfully reflected in practice and measurable outcomes. Below are some unique challenges in evaluating SSTC identified by the discussion contributors:

Firstly, SSTC evaluations lack a widely agreed-upon normative framework, reflecting the diversity of practices, contexts, and principles that underpin this form of cooperation. SSTC is inherently diverse, often informal, and shaped by context-specific political, economic, and historical dynamics. As a relatively recent and dynamic modality of cooperation, SSTC is still in the process of being fully institutionalized within global development systems. Its foundation in mutual respect, national ownership and non-interference further complicates the establishment of standardized evaluation frameworks. Evaluations may be perceived as external judgments, raising concerns about sovereignty, ownership, and reputational risks.

That said, some UN agencies have taken important steps to advance SSTC evaluation frameworks. For example, the UNOSSC Evaluation Plan (2022-25) states that evaluations should follow the UNEG standards/guidelines, and UNDP Evaluation Policy and Guidelines, where applicable, as well as consider SSC principles. The Plan notes that UNOSSC evaluations can use the following principles as a reference, when relevant: national leadership and ownership, mutual benefit, equality and horizontality, non-conditionality and complementarity to North-South cooperation.^[1] Despite this progress, broader uptake and institutionalization remain limited. The midterm Review of the UNOSCC Strategic Framework identified “monitoring, evaluation, and reporting on SS&TC at global level as a key weakness,”^[2] underscoring the need for more systematic and coordinated effort to institutionalize these evaluation principles and practices. 

Secondly, it is well recognized that the traditional mixed-methods approach–typically combining qualitative and quantitative methods within a predetermined theory of change–while valuable, are often inadequate for capturing the complex, context-specific, and non-linear development results of the SSTC initiatives. Several methodological hurdles were highlighted during the EvalforEarth discussion:

1. Attribution and documentation gaps: SSTC initiatives often involve multiple actors with overlapping objectives yet are rarely accompanied by formal agreements or robust results frameworks. This makes it difficult to attribute outcomes and systematically extract lessons.
2. Limited data and monitoring systems: Many SSTC efforts lack embedded monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems, making it hard to monitor progress in real-time or consistently track outcomes.
3. Evaluator capacity and infrastructure gaps: In many Global South countries, evaluators face constraints such as poor internet connectivity, unreliable electricity, and limited access to training. This hampers their ability to effectively apply standardized approaches—such as the OECD/DAC criteria—or participatory methods. The EvalforEarth discussion and UNOSSC reports emphasize that capacity gaps in evaluation and digital infrastructure deficits remain major barriers to inclusive SSTC evaluations.  

Although there is no universally accepted methodological guidance tailored specifically to SSTC evaluation, the discussants shared how different organizations developed approaches that provide valuable direction. For instance, CGIAR applies its evaluation policy emphasizing Quality of Science (QoS) and legitimacy through ethical, collaborative research. Social Network Analysis (SNA) is one tool used to capture the complexity of partnerships and knowledge exchange in SSTC. Similarly, Outcome Harvesting and Outcome Mapping are increasingly being used to capture non-linear and emergent results, especially in complex and participatory contexts.

Recommendations from the Discussion

The EvalForEarth discussion surfaced several thoughtful recommendations for improving SSTC evaluation:

1. Adopt systems thinking: Recognize the complexity and interconnectedness of SSTC. Evaluations should go beyond project-level assessments to consider institutional dynamics, policy environments, and social and behavior change processes.
2. Promote inclusive and participatory approaches: Stakeholders—especially beneficiaries—should be involved not just as data sources but as co-creators of the evaluation process. This ensures relevance, ownership, and more meaningful use of findings.
3. Integrate intersectional and feminist methodologies: These frameworks help unpack power dynamics, promote social justice, and ensure that evaluations are responsive to the lived experiences of diverse populations.
4. Establish evaluation quality assurance mechanisms: Peer reviews, external audits, and methodological checklists can strengthen the credibility and utility of SSTC evaluations.
5. Strengthen institutional capacities: There is a need for targeted investment in evaluator training in the Global South and for building systems that support real-time monitoring and adaptive learning.
6. Encourage meta-evaluations and synthesis: Aggregating findings across SSTC initiatives can provide strategic insights, reveal patterns, and enhance policy influence.

Looking Ahead

As SSTC continues to gain prominence within the global development landscape, the demand for credible, context-sensitive evaluation will continue to grow. While challenges remain, the EvalForEarth discussion highlighted the richness of emerging practices and the commitment among practitioners to improve how we assess and learn from these important collaborations. By embracing adaptive, inclusive, and values-driven evaluation approaches, we can ensure that SSTC not only continues to thrive but delivers transformative impact where it matters most.