Innovation platforms are equitable, dynamic spaces designed to bring heterogeneous actors together to exchange knowledge and take action to solve a common problem. Although innovation platforms are being set up to attain collectively defined development objectives, there are limited methods and tools available using quantitative data to evaluate whether they are effective.
This piece examines the prevailing thinking and trends in evaluation (specifically impact assessment), which is important for understanding how a contest of ideas has become something of a battleground in the quest for better evidence. It is particularly Impact assessment and the quest for the Holy Grail Common Fund for Commodities relevant for the many organisations, including CFC, who desire methodological rigour in their evaluations and yet have to be realistic when it comes to evaluation budgets.
This report on actors and issues in rural advisory services (RAS) aims to provide the required background information and analysis that will – together with other ongoing validation activities – enable GFRAS, the Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services, to develop its long-term strategies and work plans in order to fulfil its mission and functions. The report on actors and issues in rural advisory services (RAS) is based on a review of primary and secondary documentation about RAS and their stakeholders, undertaken in 2010.
In this article is presented an emergent capacity development approach that the authors have developed through participatory action research in Peru and Ecuador, which they call ‘systemic theories of change’ (STOC), for organisational capacity development. They argue that capacity development should be understood as systemic learning. The STOC approach promotes reflection about how we as individuals, organisations, and broader social groups and societal configurations, understand how change occurs.
Capacity development is regarded by CGIAR as an effective vehicle for sustainable development, when embedded within broader CGIAR Research Programs (CRP). This document offers guidelines on how CGIAR and boundary partners (or those partners who take up and adapt research results for the next level of users) can successfully develop and implement strategies which support this process of integration.
The purpose of the paper, using a comprehensive innovation systems failure framework, is to assess the performance of agrifood innovation systems of Scotland and the Netherlands, through analysis of the key innovation actors (organisations, networks or influential individuals), and their key functions (research provider, intermediary etc), and those mechanisms that either facilitate or hinder the operation of the IS (known as inducing and blocking mechanisms, respectively).
Using household survey data from Ethiopia, this paper evaluates the impact of agricultural cooperatives on smallholders’ technical efficiency. The authors used propensity score matching to compare the average difference in technical efficiency between cooperative member farmers and similar independent farmers. The results show that agricultural cooperatives are effective in providing support services that significantly contribute to members’ technical efficiency.
This flyer is about the AgriFood chain toolkit, which has been launched in 2013 by the CGIAR programme on Policies, institutions and markets.The AgriFood chain toolkit acts as a clearing house and learning platform – using the power of information and communication technologies to bring together people and resources.
In this paper, findings suggest that the uptake of social media is still in an early, exploratory phase associated with modest opportunities and relevant limitations of Web 2.0 mediated multi-stakeholder collaboration. Notably, there are gaps in giving and receiving feedback which are intrinsic to dyadic communication as well as innovation processes.
This guide has been prepared for use in facilitating and promoting growth in priority sectors already agreed in Decent Work Country Programmes that are based on national priorities owned and led by the constituents (Government and its social partners Employers/Business and Workers). Decent Work Country Programmes are part of national development frameworks focusing on national priorities; they are not ILO programmes.