ILAC Working Papers

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/70252

Browse

Now showing 1 - 14 of 14

Report on the scoping study for the project on ‘Impact Evaluation Approaches for Collaborative Agricultural Research and Development’
(Report, 2009) CGIAR Institutional Learning and Change Initiative; Natural Resources Institute; Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
In response to calls for new approaches for evaluating the impact of agricultural research and development programmes, and to the need to improve the impact of these programmes to meet the global demand for greater food security, a scoping study was conducted to provide a basis for a project on ‘Impact Evaluation Approaches for Collaborative Agricultural Research and Development’. Coordinated by the Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative, an Inter-Centre Initiative hosted by Bioversity International, in collaboration with the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT), an Australian university, and Research Into Use (RIU), a programme funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID), the study sought to follow up on the findings of an international workshop on ‘Rethinking Impact: Understanding the Complexity of Poverty and Change’, held in Colombia in March 2008. Research Into Use provided two small grants totalling $76,000 to support the scoping study and other collaborators provided in-kind contributions for staff time, as well as an additional estimated amount of $10,500 from the ILAC budget (provided through a grant from the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs; DGIS) for consultancy fees and travel. High on the list of findings was the need to develop ways of evaluating the impact of complicated programmes that involve a range of institutions, disciplines, situations, methodologies and goals, and complex programmes which are emergent and responsive to changing needs and opportunities. Such programmes are becoming the norm in the field of agricultural research and development, but the approaches used to evaluate their impact tend to be based on those used for the simple programmes predominant in the 1960s and 1970s which usually focused on crop improvement. Within the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), crop improvement programmes now account for only about 25% of the CGIAR research centres’ work, and the need for methodologies suited to evaluating the impact of complex programmes has become imperative. The scoping study for the proposed impact evaluation project lasted from September 2008 to May 2009 and involved conducting a series of activities. These included: • reviewing existing methodologies and other resources • documenting the current status of impact evaluation in the CGIAR system • conducting interviews with key informants • identifying potential donors • identifying and assessing possible case studies • developing a design for the project • preparing a funding proposal to submit to donor agencies A proposal for funding the project, specifically for researching impact evaluation and developing methodologies over a 4-year period, was submitted to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) in April 2009. The interest of other donors will continue to be investigated in order to scale up the project activities.
An overview of rural extension in Brazil: the current situation
(Working Paper, 2013) Sette, Cristina; Ekboir, Javier M.
This document is the result of a series of interviews carried out in November 2012 with extensionists, university professors, researchers, technicians, and extension service coordinators from different states in Brazil. A total of 14 professionals from CATI, ESALQUSP, EMPAER-MT, EMBRAPA, and independent consultants were interviewed. The information shared by those professionals was combined to build a narrative, showing an overview of the current rural extension practices in Brazil.
Randomised control trials for the impact evaluation of development initiatives: a statistician’s point of view
(Working Paper, 2010) Barahona, Carlos
This paper contains the technical and practical reflections of a statistician on the use of Randomised Control Trial designs (RCT) for evaluating the impact of development initiatives. It is divided into three parts. The first part discusses RCTs in impact evaluation, their origin, how they have developed and the debate that has been generated in the evaluation circles. The second part examines difficult issues faced in applying RCT designs to the impact evaluation of development initiatives, to what extent this type of design can be applied rigorously, the validity of the assumptions underlying RCT designs in this context, and the opportunities and constraints inherent in their adoption. The third part discusses the some of the ethical issues raised by RCTs, the need to establish ethical standards for studies about development options and the need for an open mind in the selection of research methods and tools.
Group facilitation skills for participatory decision-making: report of a follow-up outcome evaluation
(Working Paper, 2010) Sette, Cristina; Watts, J.
This working paper reports on an evaluation designed to assess the usefulness of the skills gained during the training course, if the skills learned have been applied and, if so, how the new facilitation tools and techniques have changed meeting processes. The evaluation also identified obstacles to the use of new skills faced by participants, additional follow-on activities that have been conducted by participants, and other related skills that are needed to complement what was learned in the ILAC facilitation course.
Partnering in international agricultural research for development: lessons from the ILAC learning laboratory
(Working Paper, 2010) CGIAR Institutional Learning and Change Initiative
This paper presents results of a workshop on partnerships in agricultural research for development (AR4D) organized by the Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). The workshop brought together members of the ILAC Learning Laboratory to discuss a wide range of issues related to partnership, including how and why partnership is important for their work, the types of partner they engage with, the various roles played by partners in achieving common objectives, and the types of relationships developed over time. They also discussed obstacles and issues that need attention to enable more effective partnering. Drawing upon these discussions, the workshop participants produced this paper, which summarizes their experiences and draws out common themes and lessons. It presents an overview of the role of partnership in AR4D and summarizes experiences with partnership in the Learning Laboratory, including success factors and areas requiring further attention. Beyond documenting the experiences of the Learning Laboratory members, the paper aims to stimulate dialogue about the use of partnership and improvements needed in the way organizations participate in and manage partnerships in AR4D.
The CGIAR at a crossroads: assessing the role of international agricultural research in poverty alleviation from an innovation systems perspective
(Working Paper, 2009) Ekboir, Javier M.
Globalization, technical change and migration are changing the dynamics of poverty and food production. These factors, combined with a better understanding of the nature of complex processes, are also changing the nature of scientific research, the roles researchers can play in poverty alleviation and the niches in which the CGIAR can operate. While keeping strong breeding and research programs, the CGIAR should devote increasing resources to better characterize the dynamics of poverty, redefine the networks it will use to promote the use of scientific information to foster innovation, link local innovators and researchers with international scientific networks, and help to build innovative capabilities in developing countries. These capabilities should refer not only to scientific research but also to new ways to support innovation and to design and implement poverty-alleviation programs. Finally, CGIAR researchers should adopt new research methods to better integrate into local and international innovation networks.
Building an evaluative culture for effective evaluation and results management
(Working Paper, 2008) Mayne, J.
A weak evaluative culture undermines many attempts at building an effective evaluation and results management regime. This brief outlines practical actions that an organization can take to build and support an evaluative culture, where information on performance is deliberately sought in order to learn how to better manage and deliver programmes and services. Such an organization values empirical evidence on the results it is seeking to achieve.
Institutional Learning and Change: an initiative to promote greater impact through agricultural research for poverty alleviation
(Working Paper, 2008) Watts, Jamie; Horton, Douglas
The ILAC Initiative consists of an evolving community of individuals committed to increasing the contributions of agricultural research to sustainable poverty reduction around the world. ILAC promotes research, methodology development and capacity development to increase understanding of agricultural change processes and increase the effectiveness of interventions to stimulate pro-poor innovation. This paper presents a broad overview of ILAC, including its background, origins and evolution, objectives and activities. It also presents the initiative’s central hypothesis and a set of guiding questions. Theoretical frameworks that show promise for increasing understanding of issues related to capacities to learn, facilitate innovation, and contribute to poverty reduction are introduced.
Institutional Learning and Change: an introduction
(Working Paper, 2007) Watts, Jamie; Mackay, Ronald; Horton, Douglas; Hall, A.; Douthwaite, Boru; Chambers, Robert; Acosta, A.S.
Throughout the world, the pace of environmental, social and technological change is accelerating, and this in turn has major implications for the poor and their development prospects. Traditional transfer-of-technology approaches to agricultural research can no longer keep pace with the complex, diverse, risk-prone and dynamic realities of poor farmers. If agricultural research organizations are to be more successful in reducing poverty and increasing the sustainability of agricultural production systems, they must become less isolated, more interconnected and more responsive. In so doing, they must transform themselves into learning organizations, more in touch with field realities and better able to learn and to change. Recent research on the poverty alleviating impacts of technology associated with the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) has identified institutional learning and change (ILAC) as a key area for intervention if research is to be more efficient and effective in serving the poor.
Evaluation, learning and change in research and development organizations: concepts, experiences, and implications for the CGIAR
(Working Paper, 2007) Horton, Douglas; Galleno, V.; Mackay, Ronald
The Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) is under strong pressure to enhance its capacity to learn and change. Business as usual is no longer an option in an environment that demands the increasing effectiveness, efficiency and relevance of the services and products provided by its centers. The direction CGIAR centers and the system need to pursue for learning and change will require the right blend of central guidance (e.g. from the Science Council and the Executive Committee) and center-led self-evaluation and change initiatives. Over time, the role of the external bodies and external program and management reviews (EPMR) can become focused on the integrity and quality of internal evaluation and quality assurance systems within individual centers. The success of system governance and management mechanisms will ultimately rest on the degree to which they help build and complement the centers’ own internal evaluation systems and strengthen the capacity of the centers to become learning organizations employing sound self-evaluation and self-improvement practices. Some practical suggestions for strengthening institutional learning and change in the CGIAR are offered.
Institutional learning and change in the CGIAR: summary record of the workshop held at IFPRI, Washington, DC, February 4-6, 2003
(Working Paper, 2003) Mackay, Ronald; Horton, Douglas
This report summarizes the papers presented and the discussions that took place at the workshop on Institutional Learning and Change in the CGIAR held at the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in Washington, D.C. from February 4–6, 2003. The workshop brought to together researchers, donors, and practitioners to develop a strategy for promoting a culture and set of practices conducive to institutional learning and change (ILAC) within the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) system.
Brokering innovation for sustainable development: The Papa Andina case.
(Working Paper, 2010) Devaux, A.; Horton, Douglas; Ordinola, M.; Thiele, Graham; Thomann, A.; Velasco, C.; Andrade-Piedra, J.L.
Rethinking Impact: Understanding the complexity of poverty and change. Summary
(Working Paper, 2008) Kristjanson, Patricia M.; Lilja, N.; Watts, J.
Rethinking impact: understanding the complexity of poverty and change
(Working Paper, 2008) Kristjanson, Patricia M.; Lilja, N.; Watts, J.
This paper presents six key issues from the Rethinking Impact: Understanding the complexity of poverty and change Workshop (RIW) held in Cali, Colombia, March 28, 2008. The workshop discussed how agricultural and natural-resources research can be more effective in generating solutions for poverty alleviation and improving gender, social inclusion and equity, and how such research can be brought into the mainstream and how its impact can be assessed. A diverse group of over 60 participants (42% women) from 33 organizations (54% CGIAR and 46% non-CGIAR) attended the meeting. In this paper, we do not purport to represent a consensus of opinion among this diverse group, but rather our perspectives as the meeting organizers. These â take home messages were informed by an active dialogue before, during and after the meeting. We are associated most closely with the CGIAR and much of the discussion at the meeting was focused on the CGIAR. Therefore, the key issues are primarily oriented toward the CGIAR, but they would certainly be relevant to other organizations with similar goals and challenges.

Browse

Recent Submissions