Unravelling programme success and complex causation in Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D): A systematic and comprehensive literature review

被引:0
作者
Heijden, Jeroen van der [1 ]
机构
[1] Victoria Univ Wellington, Australian Natl Univ, Sch Regulat & Global Governance, Sch Govt, Wellington, New Zealand
关键词
Agricultural Research for Development; Program success; Complex causation; Literature review; Outcomes; Research methods; IMPACT ASSESSMENT; INNOVATION; PARTNERSHIPS; CLIMATE; GENDER; CGIAR;
D O I
10.1016/j.agsy.2024.103851
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
CONTEXT: This article presents a systematic and comprehensive literature review of agricultural research for development (AR4D) programs. OBJECTIVE: The review aims to distil commonly mentioned outcomes of AR4D programs and intervention, their causal conditions, and their causal relationships. The review also seeks to unpack what complex causation means in the context of AR4D. METHOD: Following PRISMA guidelines, the review covers the period from 1980 to June 2023 and includes a meticulous selection of peer-reviewed journal articles, books, chapters, and grey literature (n = 57 from an initial sample of n = 427). RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The findings reveal a clear and limited set of outcomes and conditions, highlighting coherence and manageability within the field. However, concerns arise regarding the representation of real-world AR4D programs, with a bias towards reporting positive outcomes and successful initiatives while overlooking less successful or failing programs, particularly from Latin America and Central Asia. Complex causation emerges as a recurrent theme, emphasizing the need for innovative research methods to understand the intricate relationships between outcomes and multiple contributing factors. Furthermore, scaling successful programs is a pressing topic, challenging assumptions of replicability and calling for a comprehensive understanding of scaling processes.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 72 条
  • [1] Adekunle A., 2013, Maximizing Impact From Agricultural Research: Potential of the IAR4D Concept
  • [2] Adewale A., 2013, From Concept to Practice
  • [3] Afriat M., 2015, Tokyo: An Emissions Trading Study
  • [4] Anandajayasekeram P., 2009, Applying Innovation System Concepts in Agricultural Research for Development
  • [5] Twinning "Practices of Change" With "Theory of Change": Room for Emergence in Advocacy Evaluation
    Arensman, Bodille
    van Waegeningh, Cornelie
    van Wessel, Margit
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, 2018, 39 (02) : 221 - 236
  • [6] ASARECA, 2020, Celebrating Decades of Coordinating Collaborative Agricultural Research for Development
  • [7] Making room for manoeuvre: addressing gender norms to strengthen the enabling environment for agricultural innovation
    Badstue, Lone
    Elias, Marlene
    Kommerell, Victor
    Petesch, Patti
    Prain, Gordon
    Pyburn, Rhiannon
    Umantseva, Anya
    [J]. DEVELOPMENT IN PRACTICE, 2020, 30 (04) : 541 - 547
  • [8] The influence of multi-stakeholder platforms on farmers' innovation and rural development in emerging economies: a systematic literature review
    Barzola Iza, Carlos L.
    Dentoni, Domenico
    Omta, Onno S. W. F.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF AGRIBUSINESS IN DEVELOPING AND EMERGING ECONOMIES, 2020, 10 (01) : 13 - 39
  • [9] Impact assessment and evaluation in agricultural research for development
    Baur, H
    Poulter, G
    Puccioni, M
    Castro, P
    Lutzeyer, HJ
    Krall, S
    [J]. AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS, 2003, 78 (02) : 329 - 336
  • [10] Bayala J., 2017, Agricult. Food Secur, V6, P1