Du fait de leur transversalité et de leur objet, l'évaluation des politiques de développement territorial ne peut pas s'appuyer sur les outils utilisés pour évaluer les politiques sectorielles. Les questions procédurales sont très largement dominantes, les dispositifs portant essentiellement sur la gouvernance et la coordination. Pour évaluer une démarche procédurale, il convient de préciser le référentiel d’évaluation à la fois en termes du quoi et du comment évaluer.
Les notions de services environnementaux et de services écosystémiques (SE) ont connu un rapide engouement au cours de la dernière décennie et sont à l’origine de nouveaux instruments pour faire face à divers problèmes environnementaux, notamment la déforestation : les dispositifs de Paiements pour Services Environnementaux (PSE). Néanmoins, l’intégration du concept dans les politiques publiques reste un processus rare.
Les conventions locales peuvent être définies comme des accords légitimes négociés entre plusieurs parties prenantes (stakeholders) dans une perspective de régulation des ressources naturelles – en termes de contrôle, d’accès, d’appropriation, d’usage et d’exploitation – et de l’environnement. Au Sahel, bien qu’elles soient en vogue et jouissent davantage d’attention chez les décideurs, elles constituent des instruments encore peu exploités dans le contexte actuel de la décentralisation (Diallo, 2003).
The purpose of this report is to provide some of the groundwork in answering the question of how the CGIAR system and other public agricultural research organisations should adapt and respond to an era of transformation framed by the SDGs. It does this by exploring the way in which this transformation agenda reframes agricultural research and innovation.
This document is accompanyng the volume Public Agricultural Research in an Era of Transformation: The Challenge of Agri-Food System Innovation (available in TAPipedia here), which provides some of the groundwork in answering the question of how the CGIAR system and other public agricultural research organisations should adapt and respond to an era of transformation framed by the SDGs.
This brief discusses the emergence of Asia as a hotpot of innovation and the implications for Australia's own innovation capacity
This note presents an outline of the main strands of the innovation systems research associated with the ARISA project. It begins by locating this in the current discourse on concepts and policy perspectives on innovation and capacity building before setting out key areas of research inquiry and research activities
This evaluation is being commissioned within the framework contract for Evaluation of the EC’s main policies and strategies which was signed on 10 April 2007 between the EC and a consortium led by the German company Particip and composed of ADE (Aide à la Décision Économique Belgium), DIE (Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik), DRNI (Italian Development Researchers’ Network), ECDPM (European Centre for Development Policy Management), and ODI (Overseas Development Institute).
This evaluation examined the support the European Commission’s DG for Development and International Cooperation (DEVCO) provided to Research and Innovation (R&I) in partner countries during the last EU budget period (2007-2013). The objectives of the evaluation were to provide an overall judgment on the extent to which the EU development co-operation policy has adopted a strategic approach to support R&I and whether the approach was appropriate to enhance capacity to reach development objectives.
The main objective of the Guidelines is to provide a non-binding complement to other guidelines and offer advice to RDP evaluation stakeholders on how to carry out the evaluation activities for answering the common evaluation questions related to innovation. Since the RDP’s effects on innovation in rural areas can be expected to take place, most likely, in the long-term, the guidelines focus in particular on those evaluation related activities, which will be reported in the AIR in 2019 and in the ex post evaluation. The Guidelines are structured in three parts: