Evaluators

7. Massively Parallel Roles & Tasks

by Heidi Burgess and Guy Burgess

March 15, 2026

We are using the term "evaluator" differently from most people in our field, who use it to describe people who evaluate whether an particular conflict intervention or peacebuilding program worked (or is currently working) as hoped and planned. We are using the term "evaluator" in a different and broader sense, defining it as people who help incorporate public values into the analytical process —because science cannot do that. Scientists can tell us, within some range of uncertainty, the nature of the problems we face and they can estimate the likely consequences of options for addressing those problems. They cannot, however, say what policy is best for a community or a nation. That is a value judgment that should be made by the public (and its elected representatives), not by technical experts. For that, we need a process that involves the general public and, especially, the stakeholders who are likely to be most affected by any decision. So evaluators help decision makers take the science and put it together with an understanding of public values and priorities to try to determine which policy choices will, in specific circumstances, be best for specific groups and for the public overall.

The International Association for Public Participation is one organization trying to improve this process by helping governments and other institutions involve ordinary citizens in decisions that affect them. Its widely used Spectrum of Public Participation distinguishes between merely informing or consulting the public and giving citizens more substantial opportunities to collaborate in, or even help make, decisions. Government agencies also support such efforts. The Environmental Protection Agency’s Public Participation Guide, for example, offers practical tools for incorporating public knowledge, concerns, and priorities into environmental decision making. Citizens’ assemblies and other representative deliberative processes are more ambitious efforts to improve the interface between experts, policymakers, and the public. Randomly selected citizens are given time to learn from specialists, question advocates with differing views, deliberate with one another, and develop informed recommendations. Participatory budgeting goes a step further by allowing residents to propose and vote on how part of a public budget should be spent. These processes do not eliminate disagreements about values, nor do they replace elected government. At their best, they help decision makers combine technical knowledge with the lived experience, priorities, and considered judgments of the people most affected by public policy.