More and more, development organizations are under pressure to demonstrate that their programs result in significant and lasting changes in the well-being of their intended beneficiaries. However, such "impacts" are often the product of a confluence of events for which no single agency or group of agencies can realistically claim full credit. As a result, assessing development impacts is problematic, yet many organizations continue to struggle to measure results far beyond the reach of their programs

Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis (PIPA) is a practical approach to planning, monitoring and evaluation, developed for use with complex research-for-development projects. PIPA begins with a participatory workshop where stakeholders make explicit their assumptions about how their project will make an impact, and produce an ‘Outcomes logic model’ and an ‘Impact logic model’. These two logic models provide an ex-ante framework of predictions of impact that can also be used in priority setting and ex-post impact assessment.

This chapter examines empirical results of evaluation reports from the AfrED database in order to unpack the relationship between the demand for evaluations and the capacities needed to meet that demand. The analysis further explores ways in which current M&E training and education provision can be enhanced to respond to capacity development needs. In achieving its objectives, the chapter also draws evidence from a secondary analysis of the results of a survey of evaluation practitioners’ perceptions of ECD challenges in the sector.

Agricultural innovation is an essential component in achieving the SDG and accelerating the transition to more sustainable and resilient farming systems across the world. Innovations generally emerge from collective intelligence and action, which requires effective agricultural innovation systems (AIS). An AIS perspective has been widely adopted, but the analysis of AIS, especially at country level, remains a challenge. The need for and potential of a diagnostic tool for AIS analysis is currently receiving attention in the global agricultural policy debate.

Within agricultural innovation systems (AIS), various stakeholder groups inevitably interpret ‘innovation’ from their own vantage point of privilege and power. In rural developing areas where small-scale and subsistence farming systems support livelihoods, dominant policy actors often focus heavily on participatory modernization and commercialization initiatives to enhance productivity, access, and quality. However, existing social hierarchies may undermine the potential of such initiatives to promote inclusive and sustainable farmer-driven innovation.

Innovation is often presented as one of the main catalysts for more sustainable and inclusive development. In the agricultural and food sectors, innovation is characterized not only by specificities arising from its relationship to nature, but also from the wide diversity of its stakeholders, ranging from farmers to consumers, and including intermediaries such as the research community and advisory services. Innovation emerges from interactions between these actors, who mobilize resources and produce knowledge in collaborative mechanisms in orderto generate changes.

Small enterprises are one of the most effective factors in the development of each country’s economic and social systems, having the ability to compete with large industries, so these enterprises are mainly focused by authorities. This study aimed to develop indicators of entrepreneurship in rural small enterprises as well as identifying the effective factors and obstacles to provide strategies of entrepreneurship development. The population of study included small business owners in Fars Province, Iran that initiated business in rural areas through quick-impact enterprises project.

To give more attention to the normative character of sustainable development, the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature, and Food Quality requested for a participatory approach to evaluate Dutch agriculture, which was characterized by stakeholder workshops, dialogue, and learning. This article describes and reflects on this approach, using the Fourth Generation Evaluation framework developed by Guba and Lincoln (Fourth generation evaluation, 1989).

Here, it is described a new participatory protocol for assessing the climate-smartness of agricultural interventions in smallholder practices. This identifies farm-level indicators (and indices) for the food security and adaptation pillars of CSA. It also supports the participatory scoring of indicators, enabling baseline and future assessments of climate-smartness to be made. The protocol was tested among 72 farmers implementing a variety of CSA interventions in the climate-smart village of Lushoto, Tanzania.