Returning from the biennial conference of the European Evaluation Society (EES) which was held in Italy this year, we take away two main reflections: as can be seen by reading the program, there is a great deal of intellectual ferment regarding the role that evaluation can and should have in promoting empowerment and transforming social reality, as well as – more generally – in relation to democracy. On the methodological front as well, the discussion is active and forward-looking, focusing on eclecticism and the experimentation of the potential offered by technology (AI in particular). In both areas (ideological, in the positive sense of the term, and methodological), there is always the risk of reinventing the wheel, getting lost in seas of labels belonging to odd categorizations, or getting carried away by excessive enthusiasm. Fortunately, however, we have observed a good dose of critical thinking, both among academics and practitioners. This is reassuring and tells us that the evaluator community of practice is capable of self-regulation, digesting innovations (and pseudo-innovations) with discernment, reinterpreting the common knowledge base related to evaluation research and applied social research through updated lenses, and being ready to identify – always critically – potential advantages and disadvantages. Regarding the latter, we need to think systemically about how to manage, at the educational and training levels, the innovations proposed by artificial intelligence, ensuring that essential research skills are neither lost nor regressed, but rather are strengthened and (when appropriate) enriched precisely through these innovations.
(Walter Antonio Canu partner Centrale Valutativa )