Your search found 6 records
1 Douxchamps, S.; Debevec, Liza; Giordano, Meredith; Barron, Jennie. 2017. Monitoring and evaluation of climate resilience for agricultural development: a review of currently available tools. World Development Perspectives, 5:10-23. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2017.02.001]
Agricultural development ; Adaptation ; Monitoring ; Climate change ; Transformation ; Indicators ; Economic evaluation ; Food security ; Disaster risk management ; International organizations ; Development organizations ; Nongovernmental organizations ; Research organizations ; Assessment
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H048037)
Building climate resilience, defined as the ability to anticipate, absorb, accommodate, or recover from climate change in a timely and efficient manner, is becoming a major priority of development across multiple sectors. However, there is still no consensus on how resilience should be assessed despite the release of numerous theoretical papers on the topic. Various measurement frameworks and recommendations have emerged, but their applicability is yet to be critically assessed. Using a comprehensive review and a systematic selection approach, we review resilience assessment tools developed for the context of climate change and agricultural development, and their linkages to theoretical frameworks, with a particular focus on the choice of indicators and the scale and methods of measurement. Fifteen tools originating from diverse organizations were selected and evaluated according to a measurement framework. Our study finds that, while some of the tools remain embedded in classical approaches, by simply adding a resilience lens to previous tools and by recycling indicators, others demonstrate a true attempt to re-think in order to account for resilience dimensions. We conclude that for the use of resilience assessment tools, a major challenge is to ensure that simple and operational tools can address complexity. Full baseline should comprise both quantitative and qualitative data collection, and include more systemic indicators as well as indicators of stability and shocks. Changes should be tracked with regular monitoring and evaluation using simple tools based on key variables that capture short-term adaptive processes and changes in states, at the appropriate system level. Clear pathways to human well-being, including transformation, should be discussed through system-oriented approaches, to discard potential undesired resilient states. Finally, robust outcome and impact records from the use of these tools are needed to demonstrate whether the resilience concept is useful over time in driving development into more desirable paths.
2 Mangubhai, S.; Lawless, S.; Cowley, A.; Mangubhai, J. P.; Williams, M. J. 2022. Progressing gender equality in fisheries by building strategic partnerships with development organisations. World Development, 158:105975. (Online first) [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105975]
Gender equality ; Fisheries ; Development organizations ; Gender mainstreaming ; Gender equity ; Inclusion ; Sustainable development ; Strategies ; Partnerships ; Non-governmental organizations ; Human rights ; Political attitudes ; Policies ; Empowerment ; Livelihoods ; Interdisciplinary research / Melanesia / Fiji / Solomon Islands / Vanuatu
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H051265)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X22001656/pdfft?md5=cb19265b59990fc5a9f8bb96230e2049&pid=1-s2.0-S0305750X22001656-main.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051265.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051265.pdf
(1.35 MB) (1.35 MB)
Gender equality, a universal agreed principle and value, has been adopted widely but implemented to varying levels in different sectors. Our study was designed to contrast how gender development (hereafter 'development') and fisheries sectors view and invest in gender, and then explore opportunities to strengthen collaborative relationships and networks between the two, with the aim of improving capacity for gender inclusion in practice in fisheries. We conducted key informant interviews with fisheries (n = 68) and development (n = 32) practitioners (including managers) in Fiji, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu between 2018 and 2019. We found three points of divergence between fisheries and development practitioners and/or their organisations when it comes to the inclusion of gender into their work: (1) fundamental differences in organisational motivations for working on gender – (i.e., fisheries organisations viewed gender equality as a means to achieve fisheries objectives (instrumental), while development organisations viewed it as a core value or principle (inherent); (2) fisheries practitioners had comparatively little to no access to qualified gender focal points and training, and limited networks with gender experts; and (3) differences in what each considered successful versus failed approaches to gender integration. Our findings illustrate opportunities, as well as limitations or challenges (e.g. resistance and indifference), to transfer knowledge and capacity to integrate gender into fisheries policies and practice. We suggest using these divergences to ‘pivot change’ in the fisheries sector by building on decades of knowledge, learning and experience from the development sector focusing on four areas for strategic partnership: (1) shifting values; (2) gender mainstreaming; (3) adopting gender best practice; and (4) investing in gender networks and coalitions. We argue that fundamental to the success of such a partnership will be the ability and willingness of fisheries and development practitioners and their organisations to break down silos and work collaboratively towards gender equality in the fisheries sector.
3 Browne, K. E. 2022. Rethinking governance in international climate finance: structural change and alternative approaches. WIREs Climate Change, 13(5):e795. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.795]
Climate change adaptation ; Governance ; Public finance ; Climate change mitigation ; Decision making ; Multilateral organizations ; Development organizations ; Public institutions ; Politics ; Policies ; Agreements
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H051449)
https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/wcc.795
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051449.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051449.pdf
(3.38 MB) (3.38 MB)
International public finance plays an increasingly prominent role in global efforts to combat climate change and, as it grows, it faces a familiar challenge: governance. Global organizations not only disburse climate funding, but are also expected to ensure the “good governance” of climate programs in recipient countries. Many of these same organizations faced similar challenges in disbursing development finance. In what became known as the “institutionalist turn,” they sought to reform governance and build effective institutions in recipient countries. At first glance, the approach to governance in climate finance appears to be a continuation of these largely ineffective policies. I argue, however, that important structural differences between climate finance and development finance have been overlooked, and that these differences create space for alternatives approaches to governance. I first examine the literature on what led to the ineffectiveness of governance reforms tied to development finance, concluding that global organizations have been consistently unable to recognize and grapple with how power actually works in recipient countries, especially informal power. I then highlight three new principles underlying climate finance: (1) that it is restitution not aid, (2) that recipient countries should control resource allocation, and (3) that funding should support mitigation and adaptation. I demonstrate how each new principle has produced shifts in decision-making authority away from contributors and toward recipient countries. I discuss how alternative approaches could emerge both from forums where recipient countries exercise newfound authority, and from experimentation on the part of multilateral organizations.
4 Mekuria, Wolde; Seid, Abdulkarim; Haileslassie, Amare; Admasu, W.; Abebe, S.; Negash, D.; Getachew, T. 2024. Stakeholder analysis: improving agricultural water management planning and practices to address small-scale producer vulnerability in the Awash River Basin, Ethiopia. Technical brief prepared by the Prioritization of Climate-smart Water Management Practices project. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 12p. [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2024.216]
Stakeholder analysis ; Agricultural water management ; Planning ; Vulnerability ; Collaboration ; Decision making ; Capacity development ; Empowerment ; Water resources ; Development organizations ; Policy making ; Agricultural transformation ; Monitoring and evaluation / Ethiopia / Awash River Basin
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H052799)
(3.92 MB) (3.92 MB)
5 Tran, D. T.; Minh, Thai Thi; Dubois, Mark; Blum, H.; Mockshell, J. 2024. Strengthening multi-stakeholder agroecology platforms in Vietnam: a landscape analysis. [Report of the Agroecological Transitions for Building Resilient and Inclusive Agricultural and Food Systems (TRANSITIONS) program: Private Sector Incentives and Investments (PSii) project]. Hanoi, Vietnam: Bioversity International and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). 42p.
Agroecology ; Multi-stakeholder processes ; Agricultural value chains ; Incentives ; Rice ; Development organizations ; Civil society organizations ; Governmental organizations ; Policies ; Innovation ; Strategies / Vietnam
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H052922)
(10.6 MB)
Using multi-stakeholder platforms offers a promising approach for sharing agricultural innovation, reducing transaction costs, and catalyzing development through stimulating stakeholder engagement in the innovation process to accelerate food systems transformation. Agriculture-related multi-stakeholder platforms (AMSPs) are major players to intervention strategies of agricultural development programs. However, AMSPs face multiple challenges that limit and negatively impact their functions. This study aims to map the AMSP landscape, examine their operational activities, and provide recommendations for strengthening private- and public-sector engagement to support long-term agricultural sustainability in Vietnam.
The study used a three-step qualitative research approach to identify AMSPs and subsequently collected secondary and primary data. Results reveal three types of AMSPs classified from 35 identified platforms: (i) development organization-led, (ii) civil society organization (CSO)-led, and (iii) government organization-led platforms. Their main characteristics were then investigated according to the four basic dimensions of organizational theory: structural, contextual, operational, and relational aspects. Next, the study analyzed the influence of each AMSP type on agricultural policies and practices, including those integrating agroecological approaches. The study then examined each AMSP’s achievements and challenges related to AMSP impact and sustainability, together with the constraints related to private- and public-sector engagement, and incentives and investment in agroecological transition.
This landscape analysis has identified various mechanisms and possibilities for the Agroecological TRANSITIONS Program — and other related sustainable approach projects — to engage with these AMSPs. This collaboration will stimulate a process for the co-design and co-creation of innovative incentive mechanisms to leverage investment, support the use of holistic traceability tools, and scale-out agroecological practices in rice value chains in Vietnam.
The study used a three-step qualitative research approach to identify AMSPs and subsequently collected secondary and primary data. Results reveal three types of AMSPs classified from 35 identified platforms: (i) development organization-led, (ii) civil society organization (CSO)-led, and (iii) government organization-led platforms. Their main characteristics were then investigated according to the four basic dimensions of organizational theory: structural, contextual, operational, and relational aspects. Next, the study analyzed the influence of each AMSP type on agricultural policies and practices, including those integrating agroecological approaches. The study then examined each AMSP’s achievements and challenges related to AMSP impact and sustainability, together with the constraints related to private- and public-sector engagement, and incentives and investment in agroecological transition.
This landscape analysis has identified various mechanisms and possibilities for the Agroecological TRANSITIONS Program — and other related sustainable approach projects — to engage with these AMSPs. This collaboration will stimulate a process for the co-design and co-creation of innovative incentive mechanisms to leverage investment, support the use of holistic traceability tools, and scale-out agroecological practices in rice value chains in Vietnam.
6 Minh, Thai Thi; Ofosu, Abena; Cofie, Olufunke; Li, R.; Bobtoya, Saadia; Makenzi, M.; Schmitter, Petra. 2024. Catalyzing farmer-led irrigation development in Africa: vision and pathways drawing from business, research and development practices. Adaptive Innovation Scaling - Pathways from Small-scale Irrigation to Sustainable Development. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 12p. (IWMI Water Issue Brief 29) [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2024.219]
Farmer-led irrigation ; Irrigation development ; Research for development ; Innovation scaling ; Small-scale irrigation ; Sustainable development ; Financing ; Business models ; Investment ; Value chains ; Policies ; Incentives ; Partnerships ; Stakeholders ; Private sector ; Public sector ; Donors ; Development organizations ; Non-governmental organizations ; Collaboration ; Gender equality ; Social inclusion ; Women ; Youth ; Irrigation technology ; Solar powered irrigation systems ; Farming systems ; Capacity development ; Learning ; Entrepreneurs ; Credit ; Risk ; Political aspects / Africa South of Sahara
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H052986)
(2.66 MB)
Farmer-led irrigation development (FLID) has been part of the farming system for hundreds of years, but has only recently attracted increased attention from government institutions, donors and development organizations. Yet, despite its vast potential, FLID has only been expanding slowly. Barriers to scaling include inadequate policy and legal frameworks, underdeveloped irrigation technology and supply chains, a lack of affordable finance, and limited access to input and output markets. Transformative scaling of FLID requires identifying the sociotechnical innovation bundles that fit, designing and implementing effective scaling strategies, and fostering multi-actor engagement and partnerships to achieve impact and trigger changes across farm, local, national, regional and global scales.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
