IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jdevef/v9y2017i1p120-143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contribution analysis of a Bolivian innovation grant fund: mixing methods to verify relevance, efficiency and effectiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Giel Ton

Abstract

We used contribution analysis to verify the key assumption in the intervention logic of an innovation fund in Bolivia directed to economic farmer organisations to develop value-added activities. We focussed the research on three sub-components of the intervention logic: relevance of the farmer groups for local economic development, effectiveness of the fund in strengthening these group, and efficiency of the grant allocation mechanism. We used a case-based comparative analysis to assess effectiveness: improved market access for members, strengthened organisational capacities and the capacity to pay organisational costs. We showed that the grants to already well-endowed organisations were particularly unsuccessful.

Suggested Citation

  • Giel Ton, 2017. "Contribution analysis of a Bolivian innovation grant fund: mixing methods to verify relevance, efficiency and effectiveness," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 120-143, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jdevef:v:9:y:2017:i:1:p:120-143
    DOI: 10.1080/19439342.2016.1231702
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/19439342.2016.1231702
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/19439342.2016.1231702?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. Hartwich, Frank & Alexaki, Anastasia & Baptista, Rene, 2007. "Innovation systems governance in Bolivia: Lessons for agricultural innovation policies," IFPRI discussion papers 732, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Shikha N. Khera & Karishma Gulati, 2015. "Training Methods and Tacit Knowledge Sharing: Evidence from IT Organizations," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 4(1-2), pages 11-26, June.
    2. Diana Córdoba, 2017. "Politization, participation, and innovation:Socializing agricultural research in Bolivia," Apuntes. Revista de ciencias sociales, Fondo Editorial, Universidad del Pacífico, vol. 44(81), pages 123-150.
    3. Ton, Giel & Klerkx, Laurens & de Grip, Karin & Rau, Marie-Luise, 2015. "Innovation grants to smallholder farmers: Revisiting the key assumptions in the impact pathways," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-23.
    4. World Bank, 2010. "Designing and implementing Agricultural Innovation Funds : Lessons from Competitive Research and Matching Grant Projects," World Bank Publications - Reports 12614, The World Bank Group.
    5. Ramazan Uctu & Hassan Essop, 2012. "The Role of the South African Government in Developing the Biotechnology Industry – from Biotechnology Regional Innovation Centres to the Technology Innovation Agency," Working Papers 19/2012, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    6. Diana Córdoba & Kees Jansen & Carolina González, 2014. "The Malleability of Participation: The Politics of Agricultural Research under Neoliberalism in Bolivia," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(6), pages 1284-1309, November.
    7. Diana Córdoba, 2017. "Politización, participación e innovación: socializando la investigación agrícola en Bolivia," Apuntes. Revista de ciencias sociales, Fondo Editorial, Universidad del Pacífico, vol. 44(81), pages 131-160.

    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:taf:jdevef:v:9:y:2017:i:1:p:120-143. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJDE20 .

    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.