CPWF Impact Assessment Series

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/3622

The CPWF Working Paper Series (and its sub-series) is designed to facilitate publication and dissemination of research results (both final and interim) that emanate from CPWF-related research. Working Papers come from project-level research as well as from Topic Working Groups. The Working Paper series presents new thinking, ideas and perspectives from CPWF research and focuses on the implications for development, rather than just on the analysis of research results. The Working papers can be based on completed research or on-going research. Analysis is based on sound scientific evidence and data though it may be incomplete.

Browse

Now showing 1 - 11 of 11

Research with Development Ambitions--Partnering with Non-Researchers
(Brief, 2014-11-18) Sullivan, Amy; Harding, Amanda; Rooyen, Andre F. van; Vidal, Alain
To deliver on a development mandate it is necessary to partner. Partnerships should be based on achieving a common goal, through the partners working on complementary objectives. Partnerships should be based on related objectives, where single organisations will not be able to achieve the goal alone, and where the partnership can lead to more rapid achievement of the goals. Preferably partnership should be objective specific, temporary by nature and dynamic. No one entity can completely address the complexity of real world problems—yet they often propose to do just that. Time and money should be invested in diagnosing pathways to impact, including identifying potential partners with mandates to deliver within those areas of impact. Plan for and invest in the long and enlightening process of engagement with partners, including those who will appear (and disappear) along the way.
CPWF Learning Systems Efficiency: Survey Results
(Other, 2014-07) Schuetz, Tonya; Sullivan, Amy
Improving the resilience of agricultural systems through research partnership: A review of evidence from CPWF projects
(Working Paper, 2011-12) Woolley, Jonathan N.; Douthwaite, Boru
This paper explores the potential benefits of working to improve the resilience of complex adaptive systems in agriculture and aquaculture through engaging in diverse partnerships among different types of research and development institutions, and the people in those institutions. We use five case studies of CPWF research-for- development efforts to draw lessons about achieving effective results in system resilience. The paper gives concrete examples of effective partnerships and the positive changes that resulted for farmer and fisher communities. According to the literature (e.g. Sayer and Campbell, 2001), one key to successful attainment of resilience is the interlinking of at least three system levels. Similarly, it appears from our study that projects need to intervene at three or more system levels, with their corresponding actors, to bring maximum benefit to small rural households. In the CPWF experience presented here, one level often provides the key opportunity to mobilizing the other levels. Hence, diverse partnerships increase the chance of innovation and success when that diversity covers at least three institutional scales, for example, farm households, community-based organizations and regional policy-making. We note that there is therefore likely to be a close link between resilient results and broad partnerships in research and development. We find evidence that research products produced in this way contributed better to the resilience of rural livelihoods than those typically obtained from “business as usual”, that is, using the science-driven Central Source of Innovation model, and that such contributions were often unexpected; this merits further study beyond the scope of this paper. In most of the cases, the “business as usual” research would not have produced any of the results. In others, some key results, but not the complete set of results, would have been obtained because not all levels of actors would have been present in the research. The projects discussed in these case studies contributed to resilience of livelihoods because they sped up learning processes that were cognizant and inclusive of different system scales. This provided the checks and balances necessary to avoid promoting a change to the detriment of a long term trend, or of another system user. Involving actors from more system levels increased the ability to analyze, and generated more benefit for more people. By scoping the environment of diverse institutions for ideas, partners picked up good ones quickly. They understood “what is going on”. A further key to success was leadership of the research-for-development teams by results-oriented, committed, well-connected people, accustomed to systems thinking, which was also a result of broader partnerships.
Managing water and land at the interface between fresh and saline environments
(Working Paper, 2011) McDonald, B.
The Bac Lieu Province in the Mekong Delta is part of the Cà Mau Peninsula and is an important foodgrowing area in Viet Nam. It has a population of 830,000 with approximately 116,000 farming families living on small parcels of land producing a range of commodities for food security and the export market. These farmers and aquaculturalists1 (together called producers in this report) are highly dependent on accessing the right quality water, fresh or saline or both, at the right time to grow their crops or raise their shrimp, crabs or fish. Water is delivered through an extensive network of canals and the intrusion of saline water into the area can be controlled on the southeastern side through the operation of sluice gates, a major investment in infrastructure undertaken by the Central Government of Viet Nam. In the early 2000s, there were conflicts over water use as shrimp aquaculturalists in particular began to see their supply of saline water being compromised. Also, many producers were living in poverty and in some areas inappropriate land use was leading to unsustainable futures. This project completed in 2007 and built on the work of two preceding projects2 is helping change that situation. What’s more, this impact will continue to grow as the outputs are more widely applied. 1 The term ‘aquaculturalist’ is used to differentiate people who ‘farm’ fish from those who catch fish in the wild. 2 The two projects are Accelerating Poverty Elimination through Sustainable Resource Management funded by DFID and Increasing Water Productivity by Managing Land-water Interface: Effective Water Control for Solving Conflicts among Agriculture-Fisheries-Aquaculture in Coastal Zones funded by CGIAR. With inputs including (i) approximately US$679,000 over 3 years, 86% from the Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF), (ii) support from CPWF in training in impact pathway analysis and for faceto- face meetings between the Bangladesh and Viet Nam components of this project to share experiences and lessons, (iii) an existing water management model ready for further development, (iv) the scientific knowledge of many local and international experts, (v) the experience of a wide range of partners in water management and production systems, (vi) the active participation of the provincial and local governments, (vii) the agreement of producers to provide their businesses as laboratories, (viii) the agreements of other producers to provide their farms as control farms with a likely opportunity cost, and (ix) the participation of producer groups who shared their experiences and insights, this project: • produced an improved Vietnamese River Systems and Plains (VRSAP) model that now contributes to improved sluice gate operations to better meet producers’ water needs; • used the model and other data to contribute to the development of the Bac Lieu People’s Committee’s Land Use Policy, which recognizes the benefits of diversification and the role of saline water in farming; and • developed and evaluated a successful participatory extension approach that assists producers select appropriate technologies (and reject others) based on on-farm demonstration and experimentation. On average, the demonstration site farms involved in the project made approximately US$250/ha/ year more than the controls (extrapolated from Ni et al. 2007). The producers interviewed believed the financial gain made a significant difference to their
Citizen participation in managing water: Do Conversatorios generate collective action?
(Working Paper, 2011) Córdoba, Diana M.; White, D.
A central challenge for effective watershed management is improving the welfare of residents who live in upper catchments while providing adequate environmental goods and services to people and areas downstream. A CPWF project, Sustaining Collective Action Linking Economic and Ecological Scales in Upper Watersheds (SCALES), addressed this challenge in three sites. 1 This document is an evaluation of a project activity that intended to enhance collective action in one site: the Coello watershed of Colombia. Collective action can influence how people use and manage natural resources. It is a process by which voluntary institutions (e.g., rules and regulations) are created and maintained, often with the aim of improving human and environmental welfare and, especially for water resources, it typically involves a broad range of stakeholders who control, use and benefit from water. Examples of stakeholders include government, private businesses, landowners, farmers, and city dwellers. The SCALES project researched and fostered collective action. The Conversatorio of Acción Ciudadana (CAC) served as the collective action mechanism to promote civil society participation in public policy decisions. Supported by the Colombian constitution, the legal power of CACs enable communities to discuss policies and reach agreements with government authorities. People in the Coello watershed confront water problems that affect their livelihoods. Contamination and deforestation are two major causes of water resource degradation, in terms of both water quality and flow regulation. Specifically, fertilizer contamination of water supplies and sedimentation of waterways negatively affect downstream communities. The watershed also faces competition for water supplies. Water is extracted from natural waterways for both rural irrigation and urban household consumption. A CAC is more than a large meeting to talk and make decisions. The CAC is a four-phase process that enhances the effectiveness of local participation: (1) awareness-raising, (2) capacity-building and preparation (3) CAC implementation, and (4) review and planning. The CAC mechanism has brought together diverse actors and fostered collective action across spatial and social scales. Many types of actors have participated, including local NGOs, upstream and downstream community representatives, politically important actors (at municipal, provincial and national levels) and scientific experts in research and development (R&D). The objective of this review is to evaluate the impact of the CAC process. Evaluation methods included analysis of SCALES project reports and documentation on impact pathways, interviews and social networks. The intended project outcomes, as identified by the project implementers themselves, served as the starting point for the analysis. These expectations were contrasted with identifiable project outcomes. A social network analysis reviewed contextual conditions, mechanisms of intervention, and processes that led to the project outcomes. The evaluation also analyzed interviews with project participants. Some interviews employed techniques of video data collection, where project participants 2011.04.22.CPWF WP-IAS-08.draftv3 CPWF Working Paper - Impact Assessment Series No. 06 vii interviewed key actors regarding their perceptions and opinions of project outcomes and likely impacts. Results of the project evaluation reveal that the CAC process effectively fosters collective action in watersheds communities. Capacity-building activities of the project contributed to communities participating in meetings with multiple organizations and making collective decisions. In addition, dialogue and networking activities increased organizational and political support for communities and local NGOs. This is an example of higher-level organizations (i.e., sub-national, national and international) working with lower-level organizations and communities; in other words, cross-scale collaboration. Key outputs of the CAC process included 27 agreements with government authorities with financial commitments of over US$2 million. These agreements included projects for conservation, resource management, agricultural production systems and potable water systems. The project produced four outcomes: 1. Increased awareness of water issues amongst people in the watershed. Distinct problems and experiences from the upper, middle and lower areas of the watershed were shared. Better understanding of others’ perspectives provided incentives for communities to jointly resolve problems and establish agreements. 2. Strengthened links amongst community and environmental organizations. The CAC provided a forum for community-based organizations (CBOs) and non-government organizations (NGOs) to communicate and build support for their agendas with both communities and government agencies. Such interactions enabled organizations to establish partnerships and obtain additional public-sector funds. 3. Enhanced local capacities and relationships with authorities. New knowledge helped clarify citizen rights, along with roles and responsibilities of organizations. The CAC generated dialogue and, in turn, commitments of government organizations to work on issues raised by communities. 4. New priorities and commitments for environment-friendly land uses. The agenda of the CBOs, NGOs and public-sector agencies broadened beyond water to include land uses such as agriculture, power generation and forests. Specific development and conservation practices included organic farming, waste management, forest management and reforestation. Evaluation results show that the CAC process has the potential to become an international public good/method that can (a) facilitate community access to knowledge, technology and skills, and (b) enable them to participate in decision-making processes in managing water and other natural resources. Given the relatively short time frame between project and evaluation, impacts cannot be realistically assessed. Social change processes and associated impact require years to evolve and grow. Nevertheless, the project activities and outputs have laid important groundwork for longer-term economic, social and environmental impacts. Although the CAC process benefits from the support of Colombian constitution, similar effective collective action projects could be achieved in other locations despite not receiving such support. Civic organizations (CBOs or NGOs) can influence government decisions. As lobbying pressures and accountability for actions increase, government agencies themselves will have greater incentive to perform. The CAC process connects the people with authorities, thereby improving decisions and actions.
Review of the CPWF small grants initiative
(Working Paper, 2011) Woolley, Jonathan N.
This working paper reviews the experiences of the Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) with 14 “small grants for impact” that were contracted in early 2006 and operated for periods of 12 to 18 months. For a total investment of under US$1 million – less than the equivalent of a typical 3-5 year CPWF research for development project in Phase 1, the small grant projects made significant contributions to identifying water and food technology for specific end users (thus showing the potential of CPWF research in general); to better understanding of adoption; to stimulating research by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and to better connecting CPWF researchers in general to the reality of the development process. Four of the small grants were outstanding in their contribution across all four of these criteria; six others made significant contributions to one or more, representing a high success rate for the original investment. The quality of many of the 126 eligible proposals received was sufficient to have identified at least 20 more projects suitable for immediate funding at that time in late 2005. Unfortunately, other demands on CPWF funding and priorities on research set by the Consortium Steering Committee made it impossible to support these. This review concludes that calls for small grant proposals are an effective way of obtaining local impact and of connecting a wide range of relevant institutions to the efforts of a network such as CPWF
Aerobic Rice - responding to water scarcity, An impact assessment of the ‘STAR in Asia’ project
(Working Paper, 2011-04) Templeton, D.; Bayot, Ruvicyn S.
Rice, a staple food for over 70% of Asians, is also the single biggest user of water, requiring 2-3 times more input (irrigation plus rain) water per unit of grain produced than crops such as wheat and maize. With growing populations, increased urbanisation and environmental degradation, the supply of fresh water is depleting. Recognising the water constraints to rice yield, the aim of the project entitled ‘Developing a System of Temperate and Tropical Aerobic Rice (STAR) in Asia’ was to develop water-efficient aerobic rice technologies. This paper highlights the success of that project.
Most significant change stories from the Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF)
(Working Paper, 2009) León, C. de; Douthwaite, Boru; Álvarez, S.
Improving knowledge for targeting interventions: willingness of individuals to participate and calculation of environment indices
(Working Paper, 2009) Rubiano, J.; García, J.
We present a method for the calculation of individuals’ willingness to participate (IWP) and an institutional environment index (IEI). A description of the approach, data and procedures is presented using as a case study of data for municipalities in Bolivia. We use these procedures as examples of how these two indicators can be estimated using secondary data. The method can be easily applied to countries with relatively good socio-economic secondary data at municipal level to produce continental or sub-continental pictures of these two key factors. The purpose of developing these two indicators was to provide better information for targeting interventions as identified by the implementation of Extrapolation Domain Analysis (EDA).
Stories from the field: A most significant change synthesis
(Working Paper, 2008) Harrington, Larry W.; Douthwaite, Boru; León, C. de; Woolley, Jonathan N.
In January of 2007, a number of people working with the CGIAR challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) were invited to tell stories about the ‘most significant change’ (innovations or partnerships) they had observed as a result of CPWF activity. This paper aims to pull together some of the threads emerging from these stories, weaving them into a fabric that gives insight into CPWF approaches and achievements. The most significant change (MSC) technique was developed to more effectively moni¬tor and evaluate complex participatory rural development programs in which there is diversity in both implementation and outcomes. It has been referred to as ‘monitoring-without-indicators’ (MSC does not make use of pre-defined quantitative indicators) or ‘the story approach’ (answers to important questions about change are felt to be most readily found in stories of who did what, when and why). Authors of cPwF msc stories included theme leaders, Basin coordinators, Project lead¬ers and Principal Investigators. Most stories were based on experiences in the first call of Competitive Grant Projects. Others emerged from Basin Focal Projects or Small Grant Projects. Authors of stories were self-selected, with a total of 54 stories submitted. These stories were compiled and sent for analysis and screening to key leaders. Two categories of stories were requested: one on “the most significant technical devel¬opment/advance”, the other on “the most significant partnership change”. Within the former, there are stories on technical innovations, institutional and policy innovations, and information and knowledge management. within the latter, stories were submitted on field-level partnerships, basin-level partnerships, and capacity building. Some MSC stories focus on only one of the above categories. However, many discuss the interrelationships among categories, e.g., how an institutional innovation enabled widespread use of a new technology. more than half of the stories are also linked to a specific production environment, e.g., dryland, irrigated or rice-based, salt-affected, or aquatic. These are predominantly stories about technical innovations, and the institu¬tional innovations and partnerships contributing to their success. The remaining stories tend to focus on conceptual frameworks, information and knowledge management, and institutional and policy innovations not closely tied to any particular technology.
Strengthening CPWF project evaluations: Assessing research-for-development impact
(Working Paper, 2011-04) Mayne, J.
The Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) funds research-for-development projects for 3-5 year periods with the aim of “increasing the productivity of water for food and livelihoods, in a manner that is environmentally sustainable and socially acceptable”. Impact evaluations of CPWF’s projects serve several purposes including lessons to improve implementation, lessons to inform uptake, and credible information to CPWF donors and other stakeholders. As part of CPWF’s adaptive management approach, this paper is intended to provide ideas and suggestions directed at both CPWF and its evaluators for improving the quality of future CPWF research-for- development project evaluations.

Browse

Recent Submissions