MDPA and MSD – what are the differences and how

Main evaluation method: mixed-methods, synthesis analysis, literature review.

Positives:  Across Zambia and South Sudan, Sida-supported interventions generated tangible benefits for poor populations, including improved incomes, food security, and access to essential services. In Zambia, interventions performed better as the systems are relatively stable while in South Sudan contributions have helped sustain basic services under extreme and fragile conditions.

Shortcomings: The impact results from Sida’s work were uneven and remained limited in scale and transformative impact. Impact measures were often constrained by underuse of existing evidence in contribution designs and weak evaluability. Heavy reliance on partner-reported data, limited triangulation, and insufficient use of national data systems further created a verification gap and constrained deeper analysis.

Annexes:

• Annex 1: Executive Summaries of Impact Studies
• Annex 2: Summary of impact results from 8 cases in Zambia and South Sudan (See link for annex 1)
• Annex 3: Synthesis of Impact and Evidence Use Across Zambia, South Sudan and Wider Experiences
• Annex 4: How Can Evaluation Commissioners Think About Impact Assessments Going Forward?
• Annex 5: Sida staff Contribution Management Survey results

The aim of this Development Economics Brief is to take a closer look at remittances, with a focus on inflow of remittances to Sida partner countries. It introduces key concepts, overall trends, explores links to poverty reduction, presents and analyses data from relevant geographical contexts, and finally concludes on some of the main challenges, possible ways forward and the potential role of development cooperation. This can inform Sida’s and other development organsiations work with remittances, as one of the most important, and perhaps less explored, financial flows for poverty reduction.