IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v17y2008i3p187-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the contribution of impact assessment to donor decisions for international agricultural research

Author

Listed:
  • David A Raitzer
  • Timothy G Kelley

Abstract

Ex post impact assessments (epIAs) have long been produced by research centres of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) with a principal stated goal of informing the funding decisions of donor agencies, but there has been little formal analysis of the extent to which epIAs actually do so. To address this issue, the present analysis investigates how epIA results contribute to donor decisions via three techniques: comparison of epIA results with subsequent funding patterns; an email survey of CGIAR donors; and interviews of donor representatives. Comparison of aggregate estimates from large economic epIAs with funding patterns revealed little correlation between assessed impact and subsequent relative funding levels. Email survey responses indicate high demand for metrics directly related to poverty and which are ‘far down the impact pathway’. EpIAs are also reported as important in allocation decisions. Interviews of donor officials revealed that factors such as political priorities, perceived scientific quality and desires for continuity often influence funding decisions more than consideration of past impacts. In this context, the influence of epIAs is often indirect and ‘conceptual’. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • David A Raitzer & Timothy G Kelley, 2008. "Assessing the contribution of impact assessment to donor decisions for international agricultural research," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 187-199, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:17:y:2008:i:3:p:187-199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/095820208X331702
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Letty, Brigid & Shezi, Zanele & Mudhara, Maxwell, 2012. "An exploration of agricultural grassroots innovation in South Africa and implications for innovation indicator development," MERIT Working Papers 2012-023, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Liebenehm, S. & Affognon, H. & Waibel, H., 2010. "Assessing the impact of agricultural research on cattle farmers’ knowledge about African animal trypanosomosis: an application of the propensity score matching approach," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 45, March.
    3. Roula Inglesi-Lotz & Anastassios Pouris, 2011. "Scientometric impact assessment of a research policy instrument: the case of rating researchers on scientific outputs in South Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 747-760, September.
    4. Walker, Tom & Ryan, Jim & Kelley, Tim, 2010. "Impact Assessment of Policy-Oriented International Agricultural Research: Evidence and Insights from Case Studies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1453-1461, October.
    5. Liebenehm, Sabine & Affognon, Hippolyte & Waibel, Hermann, 2009. "Impact assessment of agricultural research in West Africa: an application of the propensity score matching methodology," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 50829, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Ainembabazi, John Herbert & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Feleke, Shiferaw & Alene, Arega & Dontsop-Nguezet, Paul M. & Ndayisaba, Pierre Celestin & Hicintuka, Cyrille & Mapatano, Sylvain & Manyong, Victor, 2018. "Who benefits from which agricultural research-for-development technologies? Evidence from farm household poverty analysis in Central Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 28-46.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:rseval:v:17:y:2008:i:3:p:187-199. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.