Rethinking impact: understanding the complexity of poverty and change – overview

Abstract

The international workshop ‘Rethinking Impact: Understanding the Complexity of Poverty and Change’ (Cali, Colombia, 26–28 March 2008) explored the challenges inherent in evaluating agricultural research-for-development efforts, identifying lessons and approaches for sustainably improving livelihoods. Use-oriented research which links knowledge with action has greater welfare and development impacts. Researchers must help to link diverse stakeholders in order to create and share knowledge for effective, sustainable action. The legitimacy of such boundary-spanning work needs to be recognised and rewarded, and sufficient resources dedicated to it. Traditional economic-impact assessment does little justice to complex poverty-related activities, which require a diversity of methods and enhanced capacity.

Repenser l'impact : comprendre la complexité de la pauvreté et du changement – aperçu

L'atelier international « Rethinking Impact: Understanding the Complexity of Poverty and Change » (Cali, Colombia, 26–28 mars 2008) s'est penché sur les défis que comporte l'évaluation les efforts de recherche pour le développement dans le secteur agricole, en mettant en relief les enseignements et les approches pour améliorer durablement les moyens de subsistance. Les recherches axées sur les utilisations qui relient les connaissances aux actions ont des impacts plus importants sur le plan du bien-être et du développement. Les chercheurs doivent aider à forger des liens entre diverses parties prenantes afin de créer et de partager les connaissances en vue d'une action efficace et durable. La légitimité de ce type de travail englobant plusieurs secteurs doit être reconnue, récompensée et se voir assigner des moyens suffisants. L'évaluation traditionnelle des impacts économiques ne rend guère justice aux activités complexes liées à la pauvreté, qui requièrent une diversité de méthodes, ainsi que des capacités améliorées.

Repensando o impacto: compreendendo a complexidade da pobreza e da mudança – uma visão general

O workshop internacional ‘Repensando o Impacto: Compreendendo a Complexidade da Pobreza e da Mudança’ (Cali, Colombia, 26–28 de março de 2008) explorou os desafios para se avaliar os esforços da pesquisa para desenvolvimento agrícola, destacando as lições e abordagens para melhorar de forma sustentável os meios de subsistência. A pesquisa voltada para aplicação, que faz a conexão entre conhecimento e ação, promove impactos maiores em termos de bem-estar e desenvolvimento. Os pesquisadores devem ajudar a conectar as diversas partes envolvidas para criar e compartilhar conhecimento para ação efetiva e sustentável. A legitimidade de tal trabalho que cruza as fronteiras das disciplinas precisa ser reconhecida, recompensada e recursos suficientes devem ser dedicados a ele. A avaliação de impacto econômico tradicional não faz muita justiça a atividades complexas relativas à pobreza, que exige uma diversidade de métodos e maior capacidade.

Nuevas formas de entender el impacto: cómo combinar la complejidad de la pobreza y el cambio – una visión general

El taller internacional ‘Repensar el Impacto: comprendiendo la complejidad de la pobreza y el cambio’, realizado en Cali, Colombia del 26 al 28 de marzo de 2008, analizó los retos inherentes a la evaluación de proyectos agrícolas de investigación para el desarrollo, y destacó experiencias y métodos para mejorar los medios de vida en forma sustentable. Las investigaciones orientadas hacia la práctica que vinculan el conocimiento con la acción tienen más impacto en el bienestar y el desarrollo. Es tarea de los investigadores promover vínculos entre diversos actores para crear y compartir conocimientos que desemboquen en acciones efectivas y sustentables. Es necesario reconocer, retribuir y financiar esta labor de vinculación adjudicándole suficientes recursos. Las evaluaciones de impacto económico comunes no captan la complejidad de las acciones necesarias para reducir la pobreza, las cuales demandan un amplio abanico de métodos y capacidades.

Keywords:

• Aid
• Gender and diversity
• Governance and public policy
• Methods

Acknowledgements

We are sincerely grateful to the team who helped us in writing the Challenge Paper and working through the CDS process: Stephen Biggs, Nancy Dickson, Keith Jones, and Doug Horton. We also express our appreciation to all of the workshop participants, and others who voluntarily lent their thoughts and views to the Challenge Dialogue process. We wish to thank Guy Manners for editorial assistance, not only with this Overview, but with all the contributions to this special issue of Development in Practice. Funding for editorial time was provided by the PRGA Program. We thank CIAT for providing the venue for the workshop, and Harvard University Kennedy School of Government for hosting the workshop planning meeting. We thank the donors of the PRGA Program, ILAC, and ILRI for their financial support to the workshop.

Notes

Source: derived from Tomich et al. (2007)

The workshop was organised and sponsored by the CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation (PRGA Program), the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) Innovation Works Programme, and the Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative – see www.prgaprogram.org/riw.

CDS, developed by Innovation Expedition Inc. (www.innovationexpedition.com), is an eight-step process for ‘improving the organizational and innovative performance of diverse groups’.

This section is based on ILAC Initiative et al. (2008).

All the papers and presentations are available on the workshop website, www.prgaprogram.org/riw.

See http://ictkm.cgiar.org/archives/KIARD_session_report.pdf.

Here ‘decision maker’ is broadly defined as anyone who might use knowledge to make decisions, including farmers and policy makers.

CGIAR Secretariat (2007): only 24 per cent of the proposals were in ‘genetic improvement’ for which rate-of-return studies (as outlined by Walker et al. 2008) are most appropriate. The 75 per cent figure refers to the investment proposals of the CGIAR Centres only ($481 million), and does not include the $38 million going to the Challenge Programmes (CPs). It would seem likely that traditional economic impact-assessment approaches apply even less to the work of the CPs than to the work of the Centres, and thus the 75 per cent may underestimate the extent to which the entire portfolio of the CGIAR is ‘non-traditional’.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Nina Lilja

Nina Lilja is a Director of International Agricultural Programs at Kansas State University and former senior scientist, Impact Assessment for the CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation (PRGA Program).

Patti Kristjanson

Patti Kristjanson is a Linking Knowledge with Action Research Theme Leader with the CGIAR/ESSP Programme on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security. <[email protected]>

Jamie Watts

Jamie Watts is Coordinator of the CGIAR's Institutional Learning and Change Initiative (ILAC), based at Bioversity International. <[email protected]>