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
[41]  
Mayne J., 2013, ACIAR Impact Assessment Series Report
[42]   Using theories of change in the CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health [J].
Mayne, John ;
Johnson, Nancy .
EVALUATION, 2015, 21 (04) :407-428
[43]   Enhancing the impact and sustainability of development strategies with smallholder farmers: participatory engagement, whole farm modelling and farmer-led on-farm research [J].
McDonald, Cam ;
Corfield, Jeff ;
MacLeod, Neil ;
Lisson, Shaun .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SUSTAINABILITY, 2019, 17 (06) :445-457
[44]   Anticipating gender impacts in scaling innovations for agriculture: Insights from the literature [J].
McGuire, Erin ;
Rietveld, Anne M. ;
Crump, Amanda ;
Leeuwis, Cees .
WORLD DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVES, 2022, 25
[45]   PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews [J].
Methley, Abigail M. ;
Campbell, Stephen ;
Chew-Graham, Carolyn ;
McNally, Rosalind ;
Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh .
BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2014, 14
[46]  
Moher D, 2009, PLOS MED, V6, DOI [10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097, 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1, 10.1136/bmj.i4086, 10.1136/bmj.b2700, 10.1136/bmj.b2535, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.07.299]
[47]  
Norton GW, 2009, PRIORITIZING AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FOR DEVELOPMENT: EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS, P208, DOI 10.1079/9781845935665.0208
[48]   What does CGIAR do to address climate change? Perspectives from a decade of science on climate change adaptation and mitigation [J].
Nowak, Andreea C. C. ;
Cramer, Laura ;
Schuetz, Tonya ;
Poulos, Allison ;
Chang, Yuling ;
Thornton, Philip .
OUTLOOK ON AGRICULTURE, 2022, 51 (04) :423-434
[49]  
Öborn I, 2017, EARTHSCAN FOOD AGRIC, P1
[50]  
Petticrew M, 2006, SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES: A PRACTICAL GUIDE, P1, DOI 10.1002/9780470754887