Monitoring and Evaluating Agricultural Science and Technology Projects: Theories, Practices and Problems

Abstract

Recently there has been a realisation that agriculture, and in particular the viability and sustainability of smallholder farming, can be a key to poverty reduction in developing countries. This article reviews approaches to monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of scientific and technological innovation projects and examines how approaches to M&E can be modified or enhanced to optimise positive impacts on those intended recipients. This article concludes that innovations are most successful when they are accomplished within ‘innovation systems’; that advantage should be taken of opportunities to involve intended recipients of the innovation at early up‐stream and mid‐stream stages of projects to assess the accuracy and adequacy of theories of change; that the types of tools and methods used in carrying out M&E influence the types of data obtained; and that the cultures of research and development institutions may inhibit reciprocal communications but the development of intermediaries between institutions and farmers could make a useful difference.

Advances in Knowledge Brokering in the Agricultural Sector: Towards Innovation System Facilitation

“…With regard to the role of extensionists, there is a shift towards -or rather the emergence of -an additional and complementary role as systemic facilitator (Clark 2002;Millstone et al 2010;Rivera and Sulaiman 2009). Terms such as 'innovation intermediary' or 'innovation broker' have been coined to indicate this role Kilelu et al 2011).…”

“…Conclusions are that an innovation systems perspective also has relevance for sectors other than agriculture, which implies that in these sectors knowledge brokering as enhancing research uptake and use should be complemented with broader innovation brokering activities. (Best and Holmes 2010;Hounkonnou et al 2012;Millstone et al 2010). The latter has become increasingly recognised in the agricultural sector.…”

Adapting to Fuelwood Scarcity: The Farmers' Perspective

“…In order to design sustainable fuelwood strategies, the local residents-as the central actors-need to be involved (Soussan et al, 1991). This can only be realized if the methodological approach applied involves the community and their holistic perspective on local livelihoods when assessing the sustainability impact of coping strategies (Millstone et al, 2010). The latter is essential for developing appropriate interventions to the adaptation measures that will enhance sustainable access to cooking energy.…”

Towards a Framework to Guide the Evaluation of Inclusive Innovation Systems

“…Method or approach Studies Macro-economic level approach [25], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39] Function-based approach [29], [21], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [51] Component-based [52], [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58], [59], [60], [23], [61], [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68], [69], [70], [38], [71], [2], [9], [72] Component-function-based approach.…”