IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v165y2018icp344-353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “Theory of Change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • Maru, Yiheyis Taddele
  • Sparrow, Ashley
  • Butler, James R.A.
  • Banerjee, Onil
  • Ison, Ray
  • Hall, Andy
  • Carberry, Peter

Abstract

Food insecurity persists in many parts of Africa and Asia, despite ongoing agricultural research for development (AR4D) interventions. This is resulting in a growing demand for alternative approaches to designing and evaluating interventions in complex systems. Theory of Change (ToC) is an approach which may be useful because it enables stakeholders to present and test their theories and assumptions about why and how impact may occur, ideally within an environment conducive to iterative reflection and learning. However, ToC is yet to be appropriately mainstreamed into development by donors, researchers and practitioners. We carried out a literature review, triangulated by interviews with 26 experts in African and Asian food security, consisting of researchers, advisors to programs, and donors. Although 17 (65%) of the experts had adopted ToC, their responses and the literature revealed four challenges to mainstreaming: (i) different interpretations of ToC; (ii) incoherence in relationships among the constituent concepts of ToC; (iii) confused relationships between ToC and project “logframes”; and (iv) limitations in necessary skills and commitment for enacting ToC. A case study of the evolution of a ToC in a West African AR4D project over 4 years which exemplified these challenges is presented. Five recommendations arise to assist the mainstreaming of ToC: (i) select a type of ToC suited to the relative complexity of the problem and focal system of interest; (ii) state a theory or hypotheses to be tested as the intervention progresses; (iii) articulate the relationship between the ToC and parallel approaches (e.g. logframe); (iv) accept that a ToC is a process, and (v) allow time and resources for implementers and researchers to develop ToC thinking within projects. Finally, we suggest that communities of practice should be established among AR4D and donor organisations to test, evaluate and improve the contribution that ToCs can make to sustainable food security and agricultural development.

Suggested Citation

  • Maru, Yiheyis Taddele & Sparrow, Ashley & Butler, James R.A. & Banerjee, Onil & Ison, Ray & Hall, Andy & Carberry, Peter, 2018. "Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “Theory of Change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 344-353.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:165:y:2018:i:c:p:344-353
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2018.04.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X17310053
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.04.010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patricia Rogers, 2014. "Theory of Change: Methodological Briefs - Impact Evaluation No. 2," Papers innpub747, Methodological Briefs.
    2. Hall, Andy, 2007. "The origins and implications of using innovation systems perspectives in the design and implementation of agricultural research projects: Some personal observations," MERIT Working Papers 2007-013, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    3. Chen, Huey-Tsyh & Rossi, Peter H., 1989. "Issues in the theory-driven perspective," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 299-306, January.
    4. Douthwaite, B. & Kamp, K. & Longley, C. & Kruijssen, F. & Puskur, R. & Chiuta, T. & Apgar, M. & Dugan, P., 2013. "Using theory of change to achieve impact in AAS," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 40213, April.
    5. Michael Woolcock, 2009. "Toward a plurality of methods in project evaluation: a contextualised approach to understanding impact trajectories and efficacy," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 1-14.
    6. Gasper, D.R., 1997. "'Logical frameworks', a critical assessment: managerial theory, pluralistic practice," ISS Working Papers - General Series 19007, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    7. S French, 2013. "Cynefin, statistics and decision analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 64(4), pages 547-561, April.
    8. Foran, Tira & Butler, James R.A. & Williams, Liana J. & Wanjura, Wolf J. & Hall, Andy & Carter, Lucy & Carberry, Peter S., 2014. "Taking Complexity in Food Systems Seriously: An Interdisciplinary Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 85-101.
    9. Thornton, PK & Schuetz, T & Förch, W & Cramer, L & Abreu, D & Vermeulen, S & Campbell, BM, 2017. "Responding to global change: A theory of change approach to making agricultural research for development outcome-based," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 145-153.
    10. Mackay, Ronald & Horton, Douglas, 2003. "Expanding the use of impact assessment and evaluation in agricultural research and development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 143-165, November.
    11. Hounkonnou, Dominique & Kossou, Dansou & Kuyper, Thomas W. & Leeuwis, Cees & Nederlof, E. Suzanne & Röling, Niels & Sakyi-Dawson, Owuraku & Traoré, Mamoudou & van Huis, Arnold, 2012. "An innovation systems approach to institutional change: Smallholder development in West Africa," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 74-83.
    12. Douthwaite, Boru & Kuby, Thomas & van de Fliert, Elske & Schulz, Steffen, 2003. "Impact pathway evaluation: an approach for achieving and attributing impact in complex systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 243-265, November.
    13. Shaffer, Paul, 2013. "Q-Squared: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches in Poverty Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199676910.
    14. Douthwaite, Boru & Schulz, Steffen & Olanrewaju, Adetunji S. & Ellis-Jones, Jim, 2007. "Impact pathway evaluation of an integrated Striga hermonthica control project in Northern Nigeria," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-3), pages 201-222, January.
    15. Springer-Heinze, Andreas & Hartwich, Frank & Henderson, J. Simon & Horton, Douglas & Minde, Isaac, 2003. "Impact pathway analysis: an approach to strengthening the impact orientation of agricultural research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 267-285, November.
    16. Nicholas Ozor & Polycarp C Umunnakwe & Ernest Acheampong, 2013. "Challenges of Food Security in Africa and the Way Forward," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 56(3), pages 404-411, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Benjamin L. Robinson & Mike J. Clifford & Sarah Jewitt, 2021. "TIME to Change: An Evaluation of Practical Action Nepal’s Results Based Finance Program," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Marina Apgar & Mieke Snijder & Grace Lyn Higdon & Sylvia Szabo, 2023. "Evaluating Research for Development: Innovation to Navigate Complexity," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(2), pages 241-259, April.
    3. van der Heijden, Jeroen, 2024. "Unravelling programme success and complex causation in Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D): A systematic and comprehensive literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    4. Cook, Brian R. & Satizábal, Paula & Curnow, Jayne, 2021. "Humanising agricultural extension: A review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    5. Marina Apgar & Guillaume Fournie & Barbara Haesler & Grace Lyn Higdon & Leah Kenny & Annalena Oppel & Evelyn Pauls & Matthew Smith & Mieke Snijder & Daan Vink & Mazeda Hossain, 2023. "Revealing the Relational Mechanisms of Research for Development Through Social Network Analysis," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(2), pages 323-350, April.
    6. Maru, Yiheyis Taddele, 2018. "Summary: Critical reflection on and learning from Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS) approaches and emerging Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) practice," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 354-356.
    7. Woltering, L. & Fehlenberg, K. & Gerard, B. & Ubels, J. & Cooley, L., 2019. "Scaling – from “reaching many” to sustainable systems change at scale: A critical shift in mindset," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    8. Maru, Yiheyis Taddele, 2018. "Editorial Introduction: critical reflection on and learning from Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS) Approaches and emerging Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) practice," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 294-295.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thornton, PK & Schuetz, T & Förch, W & Cramer, L & Abreu, D & Vermeulen, S & Campbell, BM, 2017. "Responding to global change: A theory of change approach to making agricultural research for development outcome-based," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 145-153.
    2. Birner, Regina & Davis, Kristin & Pender, John & Nkonya, Ephraim & Anandajayasekeram, Ponniah & Ekboir, Javier & Mbabu, Adiel & Spielman, David & Horna, Daniela & Benin, Samuel & Cohen, Marc J., 2006. "From "best practice" to "best fit": a framework for designing and analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services worldwide," FCND discussion papers 210, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Davies, Jocelyn & Maru, Yiheyis & Hall, Andy & Abdourhamane, Issoufou Kollo & Adegbidi, Anselme & Carberry, Peter & Dorai, Kumuda & Ennin, Stella Ama & Etwire, Prince Maxwell & McMillan, Larelle & Njo, 2018. "Understanding innovation platform effectiveness through experiences from west and central Africa," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 321-334.
    4. Hoffecker, Elizabeth, 2021. "Understanding inclusive innovation processes in agricultural systems: A middle-range conceptual model," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    5. Pender, John L. & Marre, Alexander W. & Reeder, Richard J., 2012. "Rural Wealth Creation Concepts, Strategies, and Measures," Economic Research Report 121860, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Pant, Laxmi P., 2010. "Assessing Innovations in International Research and Development Practice," MERIT Working Papers 2010-043, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    7. Schut, Marc & van Asten, Piet & Okafor, Chris & Hicintuka, Cyrille & Mapatano, Sylvain & Nabahungu, Nsharwasi Léon & Kagabo, Desire & Muchunguzi, Perez & Njukwe, Emmanuel & Dontsop-Nguezet, Paul M. & , 2016. "Sustainable intensification of agricultural systems in the Central African Highlands: The need for institutional innovation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 165-176.
    8. Genowefa Blundo-Canto & Bernard Triomphe & Guy Faure & Danielle Barret & Aurelle de Romemont & Etienne Hainzelin, 2019. "Building a culture of impact in an international agricultural research organization: Process and reflective learning," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 136-144.
    9. Lam, Steven & Dodd, Warren & Wyngaarden, Sara & Skinner, Kelly & Papadopoulos, Andrew & Harper, Sherilee L., 2021. "How and why are Theory of Change and Realist Evaluation used in food security contexts? A scoping review," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    10. Sarah Chapman & Adiilah Boodhoo & Carren Duffy & Suki Goodman & Maria Michalopoulou, 2023. "Theory of Change in Complex Research for Development Programmes: Challenges and Solutions from the Global Challenges Research Fund," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(2), pages 298-322, April.
    11. Anett Kuntosch & Bettina König, 2018. "Linking system perspectives with user perspectives to identify adoption barriers to food security innovations for smallholder farmers – evidence from rural Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(4), pages 881-896, August.
    12. Briones, M. & Dey, M.M. & Ahmed, M. & Stobutzki, I. & Prein, M. & Acosta, B.O., 2004. "Impact pathway analysis for research planning: the case of aquatic resources research in the WorldFish Center," Naga, The WorldFish Center, vol. 27(3-4), pages 51-55.
    13. Maru, Yiheyis Taddele, 2018. "Editorial Introduction: critical reflection on and learning from Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS) Approaches and emerging Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) practice," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 294-295.
    14. Faure, Guy & Barret, Danielle & Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Dabat, Marie-Hélène & Devaux-Spatarakis, Agathe & Le Guerroué, Jean Louis & Marquié, Catherine & Mathé, Syndhia & Temple, Ludovic & Toillier, A, 2018. "How different agricultural research models contribute to impacts: Evidence from 13 case studies in developing countries," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 128-136.
    15. Schut, Marc & Klerkx, Laurens & Rodenburg, Jonne & Kayeke, Juma & Hinnou, Léonard C. & Raboanarielina, Cara M. & Adegbola, Patrice Y. & van Ast, Aad & Bastiaans, Lammert, 2015. "RAAIS: Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (Part I). A diagnostic tool for integrated analysis of complex problems and innovation capacity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-11.
    16. Peter Midmore, 2017. "The Science of Impact and the Impact of Agricultural Science," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 611-631, September.
    17. Midmore, Peter, 2017. "The Science of Impact and the Impact of Agricultural Science," 91st Annual Conference, April 24-26, 2017, Royal Dublin Society, Dublin, Ireland 258614, Agricultural Economics Society.
    18. Colleen M. Eidt & Laxmi P. Pant & Gordon M. Hickey, 2020. "Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, January.
    19. Leonie Drooge & Jack Spaapen, 2022. "Evaluation and monitoring of transdisciplinary collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 747-761, June.
    20. Foran, Tira & Butler, James R.A. & Williams, Liana J. & Wanjura, Wolf J. & Hall, Andy & Carter, Lucy & Carberry, Peter S., 2014. "Taking Complexity in Food Systems Seriously: An Interdisciplinary Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 85-101.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:165:y:2018:i:c:p:344-353. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.