|
Operational guidelines for assessing the
impact of
agricultural research on livelihoods
Good practices from CIMMYT
Coordinated by: Roberto La Rovere, John Dixon
Impacts Targeting and Assessment (ITA)
Unit
CIMMYT, Int., El Batan, Mexico
Why, and for whom are these guidelines?
See 1, 2
|
|
 |
The context for these guidelines for IA. See 1,
2 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|

|
| |
|
 |
What is IA: definition, types
See 1, 2,
3 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
| How to plan an IA: Tools (1,
2,
3,
4)
teams (1,
2) resources (1),
skills? |
|
 |
|
 |
... a step back: using the IA to reflect and learn. See
1, 2
|
|
|
Preface
This manual responds to the need of CIMMYT scientists
and field partners for guidance on impact assessment (IA) . It has been
developed through a two-year process involving colleagues at CIMMYT and
various stakeholders of CIMMYT work.
The guidelines naturally draw on many sources of information
on IA, and condense and enhance what is known about IA for hands-on users:
researchers and managers of crop improvement projects and their NARS partners
interested in IA, and social scientists who are not expert in IA.
This manual will initially be published on-line so that
it can be easily upgraded and linked to other sources. Users will be able
to provide feedback, upgrade and enrich the content, and add details to
IA case studies.
The aim of this document is to help ensure quality in
IA, institutionalize good IA practices, provide a resource list of approaches,
tools, and suggestions, and give examples of how CIMMYT does good IA with
partners in diverse places and conditions.
The manual often refers to complementary documents,
such as the “Strategic Guidelines” that are forthcoming from
the Standing Panel on IA (SPIA) of the CGIAR, and draws from many sources.
Please inform us of any instances where we have neglected
to cite original sources, so we can revise the manual accordingly.
Correct citation: La Rovere, R. and Dixon, J. 2007.
Operational guidelines for assessing impact of agricultural research on
livelihoods. Good practices from CIMMYT. Working Document, Version 2007.1.0.
CIMMYT, Mexico, D.F.
Click
here to download entire manual in PDF (693kb)
| Contents (in
html version) |
| 1. Introduction |
| |
The
need for guidelines for assessing impacts on livelihoods |
| |
Applications
of the guidelines |
| |
|
Definition
of impact and impact assessment |
| |
Overview
of key operational concepts for Impact Assessment |
| |
|
Livelihoods |
| |
|
Poverty |
| |
|
Other
key concepts in impact assessment |
| |
Links
between impact assessment, priority setting and targeting |
| |
External
demand for IA |
| |
|
Investor
demands |
| |
|
Partner
demands |
| |
Internal
demand from CIMMYT |
| |
Capacity
for IA |
| |
IA
approaches to date: strengths and weaknesses |
| |
Impact
assessment quality standards |
| 2. Good
practices in conducting impact assessment |
| |
2.1
Good practices in designing an impact assessment |
| |
|
(I)
Clarify the purpose, context, scope, and limitations of the
IA |
| |
|
|
What
is an IA? |
| |
|
|
What types of
impact need to be assessed? |
| |
|
|
Why do I need
an IA? How can we use the outputs of an IA? |
| |
|
|
Is IA good for
my work? What if the IA shows little or no impact? |
| |
|
|
Who do I need
to develop an IA? |
| |
|
|
Who does IA
in and outside the CGIAR? |
| |
|
|
How do we get
rapid and cost effective IA? |
| |
|
|
What are the
risks in doing an IA? |
| |
|
|
How can the
outputs of an IA study be (made more) credible? |
| |
|
(II)
Focus on the key questions and hypotheses |
| |
|
(III)
Towards implementation: ensuring partners’ involvement,
and planning for learning and communicating the results |
| |
|
Responsibilities
and roles |
| |
2.2
Good practices in implementing an impact assessment |
| |
|
(IV)
Select/develop the analytical instruments |
| |
|
Livelihood
IA indicators |
| |
|
Good
practice for choosing an assessment method |
| |
|
|
A: Qualitative
methods |
| |
|
|
B: Quantitative
methods |
| |
|
|
C: Integrating
Quantitative and Qualitative Methods |
| |
|
(V)
Describe the impact pathway of the program/project |
| |
|
(VI)
Acquire and manage the data and information |
| |
|
(VII)
Analyze and validate impacts, and interpret the findings |
| |
|
(VIII)
Report, disseminate, communicate externally and internally |
| |
|
(IX)
Evaluate the assessment, reflect and learn internally |
| 3. Incorporating
IA into projects and institutions |
| |
Training
in IA |
| |
Writing
IA into projects, and developing a budget |
| |
Institutionalizing
impact assessment |
| |
|
|
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Olaf Erenstein, Hugo de Groote, Erika
Meng, and Jonathan Hellin for reviews, comments and contributions to the
document; Janin Trinidad for literature searches and management; participants
in the 2005 IA workshops and in the “IA platform process”;
Mike Listman for editing and other input on design and layout; María
Delgadillo for web design and layout; CIMMYT management for recognition
of and support to the improvement of IA culture in the Center; Henning
Baur for contributing as a consultant to parts of the study; and Isabel
van Bemmelen for a review of selected sections and elaboration of the
case studies from the Oaxaca IA study in Mexico.
Top
Go to Introduction
|