Testing the claim of greater project effectiveness: a systematic review of comparative evaluations of locally led development

In the sphere of foreign assistance, there is a growing push for locally led development (LLD). One common argument is that LLD approaches are more effective than traditional approaches for producing project outcomes. However, the empirical evidence for the claim of greater project effectiveness remains unexamined. This systematic review asks ‘what is the empirical evidence for the relative effectiveness of LLD approaches compared to traditional, or less locally led, approaches?’ We include studies that measure the comparative effectiveness of an LLD approach to a traditional or less LLD approach. We exclude studies that only compare an LLD approach to the status quo or doing nothing. Our index and website search (May 2024) plus snowball search yielded 1,749 hits. Ten studies passed all screening criteria. Study findings are mixed. Our main findings are: there is limited evidence on the relative effectiveness of LLD approaches compared to other development interventions; there is no evidence on relative cost effectiveness; and findings are mixed on the relative effectiveness of the same intervention depending on context and outcomes measured. We conclude that policy advocates should refrain from setting expectations about relative cost effectiveness and focus on other reasons for locally led development.Registration available OSF https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/E9FH3

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Development Studies Research
Published
2025-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/21665095.2025.2536026
Primary Topic
Global Maternal and Child Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Testing the claim of greater project effectiveness: a systematic review of comparative evaluations of locally led development

C. Odell, Annette N. Brown, Linda Muyumbu, Sushma Rajbanshi
Development Studies Research
Global Maternal and Child Health
article

Testing the claim of greater project effectiveness: a systematic review of comparative evaluations of locally led development

C. Odell, Annette N. Brown, Linda Muyumbu, Sushma Rajbanshi
article en

Abstract

In the sphere of foreign assistance, there is a growing push for locally led development (LLD). One common argument is that LLD approaches are more effective than traditional approaches for producing project outcomes. However, the empirical evidence for the claim of greater project effectiveness remains unexamined. This systematic review asks ‘what is the empirical evidence for the relative effectiveness of LLD approaches compared to traditional, or less locally led, approaches?’ We include studies that measure the comparative effectiveness of an LLD approach to a traditional or less LLD approach. We exclude studies that only compare an LLD approach to the status quo or doing nothing. Our index and website search (May 2024) plus snowball search yielded 1,749 hits. Ten studies passed all screening criteria. Study findings are mixed. Our main findings are: there is limited evidence on the relative effectiveness of LLD approaches compared to other development interventions; there is no evidence on relative cost effectiveness; and findings are mixed on the relative effectiveness of the same intervention depending on context and outcomes measured. We conclude that policy advocates should refrain from setting expectations about relative cost effectiveness and focus on other reasons for locally led development.Registration available OSF https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/E9FH3

Development Studies ResearchVol. 12(1)
Centre for Advancing Health Outcomes (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Global Maternal and Child Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.