Your search found 18 records
1 Ainembabazi, J. H.; Abdoulaye, T.; Feleke, S.; Alene, A.; Dontsop-Nguezet, P. M.; Ndayisaba, P. C.; Hicintuka, C.; Mapatano, S.; Manyong, V. 2018. Who benefits from which agricultural research-for-development technologies?: evidence from farm household poverty analysis in Central Africa. World Development, 108:28-46. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.03.013]
Agricultural research for development ; Technology assessment ; Innovation adoption ; Farmers ; Households ; Poverty ; Impact assessment ; Social welfare ; Crop production ; Varieties / Central Africa / Burundi / Democratic Republic of the Congo / Rwanda
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H048852)
(1.37 MB)
It remains a challenge for agricultural research-for-development (AR4D) institutions to demonstrate to donors which technologies contribute significantly to poverty reduction due to a multitude of impact pathways. We attempt to overcome this challenge by utilizing the potential outcomes framework and quantile treatment effects analytical approaches applied on panel household data collected from Central Africa. Our findings show that adoption of AR4D technologies reduced the probability of being poor by 13 percentage points. A large share of this poverty reduction is causally attributable to adoption of improved crop varieties (32%) followed by adoption of post-harvest technologies (28%) and crop and natural resource management (26%), with the rest 14% attributable to unidentified and/or unmeasured intermediate outcomes or factors. The findings further indicate that relatively poor farm households benefit from adopting improved crop varieties more than the relatively better-off households. Correspondingly, the relatively better off households benefit from adopting post-harvest technologies enhancing crop commercialization much more than the relatively poor households. The findings reveal interesting policy implications for successful targeting of agricultural interventions aimed at reducing rural poverty.
2 Dorai, K.; Hall, A.; Dijkman, J. 2015. Strategic study of good practice in AR4D [Agricultural Research for Development] partnership. Rome, Italy: CGIAR Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC). 111p.
Agricultural research for development ; Good practices ; Strategy planning ; International organizations ; CGIAR ; Research programmes ; Multi-stakeholder processes ; Innovation platforms ; Agricultural innovation systems ; Partnerships ; Frameworks ; Policies ; Sustainable Development Goals ; Monitoring and evaluation
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049065)
https://ispc.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/ISPC_StrategicStudy_Partnerships.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H049065.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H049065.pdf
(1.51 MB) (1.51 MB)
3 Tamene, L.; Yaekob, T.; Mekonnen, K.; Woldearegay, K.; Adimassu, Zenebe; Ellison, J.; Gurmessa, B.; Alene, T.; Dubale, W.; Kassie, G.; Thorne, P. 2019. Landscape management: Africa RISING [Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation] project R4D experiences in the Ethiopian highlands. In Mekonnen, K.; Yasabu, S.; Gebremedhin, B.; Woldemeskel, E.; Tegegne, A.; Thorne, P. (Eds.). Proceedings of a Workshop and Exhibition on Promoting Productivity and Market Access Technologies and Approaches to Improve Farm Income and Livelihoods in Ethiopia: Lessons from Action Research Projects, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 8-9 December 2016. Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). pp.55-59.
Landscape conservation ; Agricultural research for development ; Projects ; Highlands ; Land management ; Water management ; Technology ; Stakeholders / Africa / Ethiopia / Debre Birhan / Hosanna
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049336)
https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/102356/AR_proceedings_2019.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H049336.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H049336.pdf
(1.14 MB) (6.23 MB)
4 Haddad, L. 2020. Viewpoint: a view on the key research issues that the CGIAR should lead on 2020-2030. Food Policy, 4p. (Online first) [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101824]
Research organizations ; International organizations ; CGIAR ; Research programmes ; Agricultural research for development ; Food systems ; Food consumption ; Nutrition ; Public health ; Income
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049484)
(1.82 MB)
How should the CGIAR's research programme be focused to make it as impactful as possible given the changes being faced by the world's population over the next 10 years? This viewpoint suggests a firm emphasis on research needed to unlock the potential of food systems to deliver improved nutrition, environmental sustainability and stronger livelihoods, with a focus on the tradeoffs and synergies therein.
5 Buisson, Marie-Charlotte; Saikia, Panchali; Maitra, Shourav. 2020. Community water management and agricultural extension services: effects, impacts and perceptions in the coastal zone of Bangladesh. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE). 48p. (WLE Research for Development (R4D) Learning Series 8) [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2020.202]
Agricultural research for development ; Learning ; Water management in lowland ; Water management in upland ; Community management ; Participatory approaches ; Agricultural extension ; Coastal zones ; Agricultural development ; Agricultural practices ; Technology ; Cropping patterns ; Seasonal cropping ; Agricultural production ; Crop yield ; Profitability ; Markets ; Farm inputs ; Diversification ; High yielding varieties ; Rice ; Fertilizer application ; Farmers’ attitudes ; Hired labour ; Family labour ; Reclaimed land ; Submergence ; Waterlogging ; Salinity ; Drainage ; Siltation ; Water governance ; Infrastructure ; Maintenance ; Irrigation canals ; Economic analysis ; Benefit-cost ratio ; Climate change ; Research projects ; Villages ; Households / Bangladesh / Fultola / Basurabad / Bhennabunia
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: IWMI Record No: H049571)
(2.98 MB)
The coastal region of Bangladesh is prone to natural disasters and these events are expected to worsen as a result of climate change. Combined with anthropogenic factors, these events challenge livelihood opportunities, especially crop production. Waterlogging, tidal activity and the lack of proper drainage facilities are major constraints to agricultural production in these areas.
The CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE) tested, at pilot scale, the combination of innovative agricultural technologies with improved water management to overcome these challenges.
This report assesses this intervention by observing the effects, measuring the short-term impacts and understanding the perceptions. The results highlight the need to integrate the interventions into the local context, and acknowledge that institutions and markets need to mature to harness the benefits from innovations. It also underlines the potential of multi-scale interventions combining plot-level and farmer-led innovations, community management and rehabilitation of large schemes.
The CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE) tested, at pilot scale, the combination of innovative agricultural technologies with improved water management to overcome these challenges.
This report assesses this intervention by observing the effects, measuring the short-term impacts and understanding the perceptions. The results highlight the need to integrate the interventions into the local context, and acknowledge that institutions and markets need to mature to harness the benefits from innovations. It also underlines the potential of multi-scale interventions combining plot-level and farmer-led innovations, community management and rehabilitation of large schemes.
6 Seifu, M.; van Paassen, A.; Klerkx, L.; Leeuwis, C. 2020. Anchoring innovation methodologies to ‘go-to-scale’; a framework to guide agricultural research for development. Agricultural Systems, 182:102810. (Online first) [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102810]
Agricultural research for development ; Agricultural innovation systems ; Stakeholders ; Innovation platforms ; Frameworks ; Institutions ; Farmer participation ; Projects ; Strategies / Ethiopia
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049698)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X19302732/pdfft?md5=1b7dfd2ad7035c522c04871ff57755e0&pid=1-s2.0-S0308521X19302732-main.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H049698.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H049698.pdf
(5.33 MB) (5.33 MB)
Research for development (R4D) projects increasingly engage in multi-stakeholder innovation platforms (IPs) as an innovation methodology, but there is limited knowledge of how the IP methodology spreads from one context to another. That is, how experimentation with an IP approach in one context leads to it being succesfully replicated in other contexts. To inspire development actors to consider the fit of an innovation methodology for a context, following work on anchoring for scaling, we developed a framework for networking-, methodological, and institutional anchoring and applied it to a R4D IP in order to test the value of such an anchoring approach for understanding the scaling of innovation methodologies such as IP. We selected a R4D project with a Farmer Research Group-Innovation Platform in Ethiopia, whose technical output and methodological approach were greatly appreciated by the actors involved. Using the anchoring framework, the executed or non-executed tasks were identified. Besides, the embedding of the methodological experiment the potential up-scaling and out-scaling were systematically analyzed. The analysis yielded the strengths and weaknesses of the anchoring work done so far to scale the innovation methodology used, and provided concrete suggestions of how to proceed if an innovation project considers ‘going to scale’. We recommend R4D projects to valorize their work and pay more explicit attention to anchoring. With a flexible, multi-pronged anchoring approach and continuous scanning of the progress made in context, more R4D projects and their associated innovation methodologies can ‘go to scale’.
7 International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 2020. IWMI Gender and Inclusion Strategy 2020-2023: new landscapes of water equality and inclusion. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 16p. [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2020.205]
Gender equality ; Inclusion ; Strategies ; Organizational change ; Water security ; Water systems ; Digital innovation ; Data management ; Sustainable Development Goals ; Social inequalities ; Equity ; Women ; Social development ; Empowerment ; Structural change ; Climate change ; Resilience ; Risk reduction ; Food systems ; Ecosystems ; Water use ; Multiple use ; Agricultural research for development ; Research programmes ; CGIAR ; Research institutions ; Intervention ; Stakeholders ; Policies ; Knowledge management ; Capacity building
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: IWMI Record No: H049876)
(1.16 MB)
8 Byerlee, D.; Lynam, J. K. 2020. The development of the international center model for agricultural research: a prehistory of the CGIAR. World Development, 135:105080. (Online first) [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105080]
Agricultural research for development ; CGIAR ; International organizations ; Research networks ; Research systems ; Natural resources management ; Farming systems research ; Agricultural sciences ; Crop improvement ; Green revolution ; Funding ; International cooperation ; Political aspects ; Sustainability
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049900)
(0.82 MB)
On the eve of the 50th anniversary of the founding of the CGIAR, this paper revisits the genesis of the international center model for agricultural research (IARC). This model became fashionable in the 1960s and was arguably the major institutional innovation of the 20th century for foreign assistance to agriculture. While the founding of the first IARCs is universally attributed to the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, we argue that based on new evidence, the creation of the IARCs was a logical conclusion of a process involving many actors that began immediately after World War I. First, we review FAO efforts to build regional and global research networks for the major cereals in the immediate post-WWII period. These networks linked closely to USDA and its legacy of scientific collaboration across US states that together with the Foundations, strongly influenced the design of the first two international centers for the major cereals. In Latin America, the various efforts by the US National Academy of Sciences, the US government and the countries of the region resulted in the creation of three centers for tropical agriculture, (only two of which exist today) with a broader research focus on farming systems and natural resources. Finally, we show how the establishment of four IARCs in Africa in different ways drew on a colonial legacy that had moved toward centralization of research across colonial territories since before WWII. All of these efforts over many decades involved a good deal of experimentation in organization, funding and governance to arrive at the standard IARC model that emerged. By the late 1960s, the genesis of another six IARCs was already in place stimulating the creation of the CGIAR to fund and coordinate the IARCs. The review concludes with a brief reflection on the successes and challenges of the IARC model over 50 years, and its relevance today.
9 Parry, K.; van Rooyen, A. F.; Bjornlund, H.; Kissoly, L.; Moyo, M.; de Sousa, W. 2020. The importance of learning processes in transitioning small-scale irrigation schemes. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 36(S1):S199-S223. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2020.1767542]
Irrigation schemes ; Small scale systems ; Agricultural innovation systems ; Innovation platforms ; Learning activities ; Government managed irrigation systems ; Irrigation practices ; Agricultural research for development ; Stakeholders ; Farmers ; Training ; Knowledge ; Monitoring ; Social aspects ; Households / Africa South of Sahara / Mozambique / United Republic of Tanzania / Zimbabwe
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050067)
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/07900627.2020.1767542?needAccess=true
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050067.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050067.pdf
(1.51 MB) (1.51 MB)
Many small-scale irrigation schemes are dysfunctional, and learning, innovation and evaluation are required to facilitate sustainable transitions. Using quantitative and qualitative data from five irrigation schemes in sub-Saharan Africa, we analyze how learning and change arose in response to: soil monitoring tools, which triggered a deep learning cycle; and agricultural innovation platforms, which helped develop a social learning system. Knowledge generation and innovation were driven by the incentives of more profitable farming. Learning and change spread to farmers without the tools, and learning at different levels resulted in extension and governance stakeholders facilitating profound institutional change.
10 Bjornlund, H.; van Rooyen, A.; Pittock, J.; Bjornlund, V. 2021. Changing the development paradigm in African agricultural water management to resolve water and food challenges. Water International, 19p. (Online first) [doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2021.1981579]
Water management ; Agricultural research for development ; Food security ; Productivity ; Food production ; Profitability ; Water availability ; Irrigation management ; Irrigation schemes ; Infrastructure ; Governance ; Farmers ; Rural communities / Africa South of Sahara
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050689)
(2.04 MB)
Meeting growing demand for water and food in Africa, and other parts of the Global South, presents a significant and critical challenge over the next 50 years. This paper draws on an ongoing project in Africa to outline the research-for-development work that is urgently required to facilitate a paradigm shift in agricultural water management. Such work should lead to increased productivity and profitability of agricultural water use to allow agriculture to release some water to meet the growing needs of other sectors, while still meeting food security needs and contributing to a prosperous rural population.
11 Child, K.; Desta, G.; Douthwaite, B.; Haileslassie, Amare; van Rooyen, A.; Tamene, L.; Uhlenbrook, Stefan. 2021. Impact tracking: a practitioner-developed approach to scaling agricultural innovation in Ethiopia. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE). 28p. (WLE Legacy Series 1) [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2021.226]
Agricultural innovation ; Scaling ; Impact assessment ; Agricultural research for development ; Project evaluation ; Policies ; Research programmes ; Funding ; Partnerships ; Community involvement ; Watershed management ; Irrigation equipment ; Taxes ; Landscape ; Data management ; Stakeholders ; Collaboration ; Case studies ; Innovation scaling / Ethiopia / Yewol Watershed
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050789)
(2.21 MB)
This paper argues for more creativity and flexibility in agricultural research for development (AR4D) scaling and impact evaluation in complex contexts. While acknowledging the importance of setting reasonable end-of-project targets and outcomes, we argue that the achievement of outcomes and impacts, particularly in complex contexts, requires adaptive management and acknowledgment that significant positive outcomes and impacts may occur after the project funding cycle is complete. The paper presents a practitioner-developed approach to scaling AR4D innovations called Impact Tracking (IT). We illustrate IT in practice by presenting three case studies from Ethiopia in which IT proved crucial to achieving impact. The paper concludes by drawing lessons from the case studies and discussing what implications IT may have for development practitioners.
12 Douthwaite, B.; Child, K. 2021. How agricultural research for development achieves developmental outcomes: learning lessons to inform One CGIAR science and technology policy research. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE). 27p. (WLE Legacy Series 2) [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2022.201]
Agricultural research for development ; CGIAR ; Research programmes ; Impact assessment ; Monitoring and evaluation ; Agricultural innovation ; Technology ; Policy innovation ; Agronomy ; Capacity development ; Advisory services ; Soil quality ; Cassava ; Seed certification ; Fertilizers ; Phytosanitary measures ; Solar energy ; Irrigation systems ; Electricity supplies ; Donors ; Funding ; State intervention ; Farmers ; Databases ; Models ; Case studies / Ethiopia / India / United Republic of Tanzania
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050909)
(1.14 MB)
At the end of 2021, CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs) will be replaced by Initiatives housed within One CGIAR. This new modality is intended to achieve higher levels of impact at a faster rate and at reduced cost compared to the CRPs. As One CGIAR begins, there is a unique opportunity to reflect on what has worked in different contexts. In this paper, we provide findings that relate to One CGIAR’s overarching view of how it will achieve positive and measurable impacts, and for agricultural research for development (AR4D) more generally. Specifically, we draw from three related CRP evaluations to identify how different types of AR4D approaches have contributed to successful outcomes. In the final section of the paper, we present our conclusions and provide a list of recommendations for the science and technology policy of One CGIAR and possibly other integrated research for development programs.
13 Johnson, N. 2021. Measuring the impact of integrated systems research: promising approaches and why CGIAR needs to care. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE). 21p. [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2022.203]
Agricultural research for development ; Integrated systems ; Systems research ; Impact assessment ; CGIAR ; Research programmes ; Monitoring and evaluation ; Natural resources management ; Investment ; Funding ; Organizational learning ; Food systems ; Land use ; Water systems ; Remote sensing
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050911)
(2.50 MB)
Measuring the impact of integrated systems research has been a challenge to CGIAR since it expanded into natural resource management research in the early 1990s. Despite repeated efforts, it has yet to be adequately addressed. Meanwhile, the demand for evidence of impact on development outcomes has only increased, as have calls for greater methodological rigor. At the same time, there is greater recognition of the complex, systemic nature of many problems facing society today and the need for new approaches to designing, implementing and evaluating research. In an attempt to provide pragmatic guidance to One CGIAR and others on how to address these issues in the design of research for development programs that involve integrated systems research (ISR), CGIAR held a virtual workshop on Measuring the Impact of Integrated Systems Research on September 27–30, 2021. Participants took stock of recent experiences and reviewed existing and new tools and approaches with the potential to overcome conceptual, empirical and institutional challenges that obstruct ISR. In terms of methods for assessing the impact of ISR, the workshop highlighted recent advances in the use of geospatial data and called for more significant investment in both the quantity and quality of qualitative methods. Integrating monitoring, evaluation, learning and impact assessment (MELIA) into the research programs will require greater capacity on the part of managers, researchers and MELIA specialists to use theory of change effectively and efficiently for multiple purposes. It is also becoming increasingly clear that some of the challenges in conducting ISR in CGIAR are not technical but have to do with structures, processes and internal tensions within CGIAR itself about the kind of outcomes it seeks and the way it organizes and implements research. While calling for research that contributes to sustainability and systems transformation, CGIAR has in different ways failed to adequately support, and to learn from, the kinds of integrated systems approaches that will likely underpin success. Workshop participants proposed tackling this head-on through changing CGIAR systems, processes and incentive structures, and engaging directly with funders on how impact is understood and measured.
14 Chinseu, E. L.; Dougill, A. J.; Stringer, L. C. 2022. Strengthening conservation agriculture innovation systems in Sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from a stakeholder analysis. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 20(1):17-30. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2021.1911511]
Conservation agriculture ; Innovation systems ; Stakeholder analysis ; Climate-smart agriculture ; Farming systems ; Agricultural research for development ; Sustainable intensification ; Land management ; Policies ; Government ; Non-governmental organizations ; Donors ; Collaboration / Africa South of Sahara / Malawi
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050921)
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14735903.2021.1911511
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050921.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050921.pdf
(2.33 MB) (2.33 MB)
Complexity of African agrarian systems necessitates that agricultural research and development transition to agricultural innovation system [AIS] approaches. While AIS perspectives are embraced across sub-Saharan Africa, engagement of stakeholders in agricultural research and development processes as espoused in AIS paradigm remains limited. This paper aims to analyze key stakeholders in the AIS in Malawi using the case of Conservation Agriculture [CA]. We analyze roles, organizational capacity and collaboration of stakeholders in Malawi’s CA innovation system. Although Government has the most extensive role, NGOs dominate the national CA agenda, while smallholder farmers remain passive recipients of CA interventions. Many CA promoters lack technical and financial capacity, and pursue limited collaboration, which diminish prospects of inclusive stakeholder engagement. While insufficient resources lead to inadequate technical support to smallholders, the limited collaboration hinders integration of programmes, multiple sources of innovation and knowledge required to foster social learning and sustainability of CA. Our findings indicate a need to: (1) strengthen understanding of AIS approaches among CA innovation system stakeholders; (2) build stronger partnerships in CA research and development by strengthening stakeholder platforms and social processes; (3) strengthen collaboration advisory mechanisms to facilitate knowledge-sharing, resource mobilization and joint programme implementation with strengthened feedback loops.
15 Joshi, Deepa; Braaten, Y.; Hakhu, Arunima; Pradhan, Rubina; Gallant, Bryce. 2021. Gender and inclusion in the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE): an end of program reflection and evaluation. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE). 30p. (WLE Legacy Series 5) [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2022.207]
Gender equality ; Social inclusion ; CGIAR ; Research programmes ; Project evaluation ; Agricultural research for development ; Gender-transformative approaches ; Women ; Marginalization ; Social change ; Norms ; Learning ; Institutions ; Corporate culture ; Stakeholders ; Policies ; Diversification ; Impact assessment
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050977)
(2.87 MB)
The growing relevance of research on gender and social inclusion in agricultural research for development calls for systemic, transformative change processes. Transformative gender ambitions can stand at odds with personal biases and experiences that shape diverse understandings of gender, institutional values, structures and cultures that tend to reward technological quick-fix solutions, and other practical challenges to ‘doing’ gender on the ground. Very little is known about these challenges. How are these challenges navigated by (relatively small) teams of gender researchers, who are often caught between the demand for tangible fast gains on gender, and the intractable challenges of deep-rooted and complex, intersectional gender inequalities? This was the focus of the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE) End of Program Reflection and Evaluation (EoPRE) to assess how gender and inclusion research is pursued, and the key barriers to knowing and doing gender in eight research projects. Adopting a reflexive, self-analytical feminist approach to evaluation, this EoPRE facilitated eight project teams, diverse and with an uneven focus on gender, to connect the dots between the processes of knowing and doing gender research. A key finding of this evaluation is that the need for change is foremost internal. We need to begin by fixing our personal biases and assumptions, and fixing institutional cultures, values and structures instead of just trying to fix things out there, including fixing poor and marginalized women. A key recommendation is to seek more regular and open conversations across researcher disciplines and hierarchies, and between CGIAR and external partners and stakeholders, including feminist grassroots actors and networks – on what works well (and does not) and why. This would allow us to grasp why we start with different meanings and conceptualizations of gender; how agile we are (or not) in adapting to changes on the ground; and how, through a culture of reflection and learning, we might shift pathways to more transformative change processes in a fast evolving and increasingly unequal world.
16 Steinke, J.; Ortiz-Crespo, B.; van Etten, J.; Muller, A. 2022. Participatory design of digital innovation in agricultural research-for-development: insights from practice. Agricultural Systems, 195:103313. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103313]
Agricultural research for development ; Participatory approaches ; Digital technology ; Innovation ; Information and Communication Technologies ; Smallholders ; Farming systems ; Stakeholders ; Decision making ; Decision support systems ; Agricultural development ; Food security / Africa South of Sahara / Latin America
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H051056)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X21002663/pdfft?md5=90156036dc633f3bb1b7a2f24a54688c&pid=1-s2.0-S0308521X21002663-main.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051056.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051056.pdf
(1.73 MB) (1.73 MB)
CONTEXT: Innovation based on information and communication technology (ICT) plays an increasingly important role in agricultural research-for-development efforts. It has been recognized, however, that the weak adoption and low impact of many ICT-for-agriculture (ICT4Ag) efforts are partly due to poor design. Often, design was driven more by technological feasibility than by a thorough analysis of the target group's needs and capacities. For more user-centered ICT4Ag development, there is now growing interest in the use of systematic, participatory design methodologies.
OBJECTIVE: Numerous methodologies for participatory design exist, but applying any of them in smallholder farming context can create specific challenges that digital development researchers need to deal with. This article aims to support future digital development efforts by contributing practical insights to recent discussions on the use of participatory design methodologies for ICT4Ag development.
METHODS: We present lessons learned from practical experiences within participatory design projects that developed ICT4Ag solutions in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. Based on these experiences and supported by literature, we describe common challenges and limitations that digital designers may face in practice, and discuss possible opportunities for dealing with them.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of digital design projects within research-for-development efforts can be affected by tensions between design ideals and project realities. These tensions may relate to, among others, mismatching expectations among project stakeholders, top-down hierarchies at design partners, insufficient attention to the wider digital ecosystem, and disincentives to re-use ideas and software. Depending on project context, these challenges may need to be addressed by researchers during planning and implementation of digital design projects.
SIGNIFICANCE: The insights in this article may support agricultural development researchers in facilitating more effective participatory design processes. Even though good design is not the only precondition for a successful ICT4Ag service, this can help create more meaningful digital innovation for agricultural development.
OBJECTIVE: Numerous methodologies for participatory design exist, but applying any of them in smallholder farming context can create specific challenges that digital development researchers need to deal with. This article aims to support future digital development efforts by contributing practical insights to recent discussions on the use of participatory design methodologies for ICT4Ag development.
METHODS: We present lessons learned from practical experiences within participatory design projects that developed ICT4Ag solutions in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. Based on these experiences and supported by literature, we describe common challenges and limitations that digital designers may face in practice, and discuss possible opportunities for dealing with them.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of digital design projects within research-for-development efforts can be affected by tensions between design ideals and project realities. These tensions may relate to, among others, mismatching expectations among project stakeholders, top-down hierarchies at design partners, insufficient attention to the wider digital ecosystem, and disincentives to re-use ideas and software. Depending on project context, these challenges may need to be addressed by researchers during planning and implementation of digital design projects.
SIGNIFICANCE: The insights in this article may support agricultural development researchers in facilitating more effective participatory design processes. Even though good design is not the only precondition for a successful ICT4Ag service, this can help create more meaningful digital innovation for agricultural development.
17 International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 2022. Evidence-based strategies to accelerate innovation scaling in agricultural value chains. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 8p.
Agricultural value chains ; Innovation ; Scaling up ; Strategies ; Capacity development ; Agricultural research for development ; Private sector ; Smallholders ; Business models ; Commercialization ; Farmer-led irrigation ; Innovation scaling / Africa / Ethiopia / Ghana / Mali / Zambia
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H051386)
(4.91 MB)
18 McGuire, E.; Leeuwis, C.; Rietveld, A. M.; Teeken, B. 2024. Anticipating social differentiation and unintended consequences in scaling initiatives using GenderUp, a method to support responsible scaling. Agricultural Systems, 215:103866. (Online first) [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2024.103866]
Gender equity ; Social inclusion ; Social differentiation ; Agricultural research for development ; Agricultural innovation systems ; Scaling up ; Sustainable Development Goals
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H052544)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X24000167/pdfft?md5=a639d31b187285c2cd46bdb1e7436441&pid=1-s2.0-S0308521X24000167-main.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H052544.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H052544.pdf
(3.65 MB) (3.65 MB)
CONTEXT: A key strategy in progressing towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is scaling innovations to improve livelihoods of marginalized populations globally. Consequently, there has been a heightened emphasis on Agriculture Research for Development (AR4D) innovation teams' ability to swiftly identify innovations that can be scaled for broad impact. However, insufficient attention has been paid to the equitable distribution of benefits among different demographic groups, leading to documented unintended consequences affecting some of the most marginalized communities. To effectively contribute to the SDGs and avoid harm to specific groups, AR4D innovation teams must conscientiously consider various dimensions of diversity, including gender and other relevant factors.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to introduce GenderUp, a new conversational method for responsible scaling, oriented to making scaling initiatives more inclusive and anticipatory of socially differentiated trade-offs. This new AR4D scaling tool seeks to ensure that scaling efforts not only contribute effectively to the SDGs but also consider and mitigate unintended consequences for marginalized communities.
METHODS: This paper describes a new socially responsible scaling tool. Starting with a defined innovation, GenderUp helps: i) identify relevant diversity and intersectionality among intended innovation users; and ii) re-direct scaling strategies to better anticipate and mitigate unintended consequences for specific social groups. Through a series of five stages, a GenderUp facilitator guides teams through discussions, learning activities, and practical integration to develop a socially responsible scaling strategy. We provide details about each stage and reflect on the results of two early pilot experiences.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for increased recognition of the distribution of innovation benefits based on dimensions of diversity. GenderUp is proposed as a new method to systematically address social differentiation in the scaling of AR4D innovation. GenderUp supported two different innovation and scaling teams to rethink their scaling strategies. Both innovation teams identified at-risk intersectional profiles and made adjustments to their scaling strategies to ensure these groups were not harmed by the innovation or scaling activities. These promising examples suggest that GenderUp provides a simple ex-ante analysis that can reduce unintended consequences more broadly within AR4D.
SIGNIFICANCE: Although gender and social equity are prioritized globally there are very few experts, tools, and systems in place to achieve these cross-cutting goals. While GenderUp only addresses innovation at the scaling stage, it is a step towards systemizing responding to social differentiation within AR4D to at least do no harm, and at best improve social outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to introduce GenderUp, a new conversational method for responsible scaling, oriented to making scaling initiatives more inclusive and anticipatory of socially differentiated trade-offs. This new AR4D scaling tool seeks to ensure that scaling efforts not only contribute effectively to the SDGs but also consider and mitigate unintended consequences for marginalized communities.
METHODS: This paper describes a new socially responsible scaling tool. Starting with a defined innovation, GenderUp helps: i) identify relevant diversity and intersectionality among intended innovation users; and ii) re-direct scaling strategies to better anticipate and mitigate unintended consequences for specific social groups. Through a series of five stages, a GenderUp facilitator guides teams through discussions, learning activities, and practical integration to develop a socially responsible scaling strategy. We provide details about each stage and reflect on the results of two early pilot experiences.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for increased recognition of the distribution of innovation benefits based on dimensions of diversity. GenderUp is proposed as a new method to systematically address social differentiation in the scaling of AR4D innovation. GenderUp supported two different innovation and scaling teams to rethink their scaling strategies. Both innovation teams identified at-risk intersectional profiles and made adjustments to their scaling strategies to ensure these groups were not harmed by the innovation or scaling activities. These promising examples suggest that GenderUp provides a simple ex-ante analysis that can reduce unintended consequences more broadly within AR4D.
SIGNIFICANCE: Although gender and social equity are prioritized globally there are very few experts, tools, and systems in place to achieve these cross-cutting goals. While GenderUp only addresses innovation at the scaling stage, it is a step towards systemizing responding to social differentiation within AR4D to at least do no harm, and at best improve social outcomes.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
