- Home
- About us
- ILAC Activities
- Resources
- ILAC Publications
- ILAC Briefs
- ILAC Sourcebook
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Chapter 6: Introduction Part 2
- Chapter 7: Innovation histories
- Chapter 9: Culture study as a tool for change
- Chapter 12: Collaborative agreements
- Chapter 13: Facilitation as a foundation skill for ILAC
- Chapter 14: Learning alliances
- Chapter 15: Institutional histories
- Chapter 16: Engaging Scientists through Institutional Histories
- Chapter 18: Horizontal evaluation
- Chapter 19: Appreciative inquiry
- Part 3 - Cases and experiences
- Part 4 - Challenges and strategies
- About the authors
- Glossary
- References
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Presentations by ILAC Team
- Working Papers
- Journal Articles
- Newsletter
- Reports
- ILAC Library
- Tools and methods for M&E
- Appreciative inquiry
- Biophysical measurements
- Case study
- Content analysis
- Contribution analysis
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Creative expression
- Diaries, journals and logs
- Dreams realised or visioning
- Expert review
- GIS mapping
- Graphing results
- Group assessment
- Historical trends and timelines
- Horizontal evaluation
- Impact evaluation
- Benefit-cost methods
- Case studies
- Cost-effectiveness analysis
- Counterfactual Impact Evaluation (CIE)
- Difference-in-difference
- Econometric methods
- Ex-post comparison of project beneficiaries with a control group
- Instrumental variables
- Integrated partial indicators
- Mathematical programming
- Modified peer review
- Partial indicators of impact
- Patent analysis
- Pipeline comparison
- Production function approach
- Propensity score matching
- Quasi-experimental design, involving the use of matched control and project groups
- Randomization
- Rapid assessment or review, conducted ex post
- Regression discontinuity design
- Simulation method
- User surveys
- Impact flow diagram
- Innovation histories
- Institutional history
- Institutional linkage diagram
- Interviews
- Learning alliances
- Learning-oriented evaluation
- M&E Frameworks
- M&E wheel (or "spider web")
- Mapping (sketch)
- Matrix scoring
- Most significant change
- Net-Map
- Non-random sampling
- Observation
- Outcome mapping
- Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis
- Participatory methods
- Performance indicators
- Photographs and video
- Problem and objectives trees
- Random sampling
- Ranking and pocket charts
- Rapid appraisal methods
- Relative scales or ladders
- Rich pictures (or mind maps)
- SWOT
- Seasonal calendars
- Semantic differentials
- Social mapping or well-being ranking
- Sociograms
- Stakeholder analysis
- Survey
- Systems (or inputs-outputs) diagram
- Theory-Based Evaluation
- Transects
- Evaluation studies and reports
- Evaluating capacity development
- Partnership
- Seminars
- Video Room
- Links to other sites
- E-learning courses
- ILAC Publications
- Contact
- Blog
The impact of agricultural research on productivity and poverty in sub-Saharan Africa
Tue, 08/11/2009 - 15:24 — Cristina Sette
Publication Type:
Journal ArticleSource:
Food Policy, Volume 34, Issue 2, p.198-209 (2009)Keywords:
agricultural research; Evaluation; poverty reduction; rate of return; sub-Saharan AfricaAbstract:
While it is widely recognized that agricultural research is a key driver of broad-based technological change in agriculture that benefits the poor in many different ways, little is known about its aggregate impacts on productivity growth and poverty reduction in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Using a polynomial distributed lag structure for agricultural research within a simultaneous system of equations framework, this paper first demonstrates that agricultural research contributes significantly to productivity growth in SSA. Productivity growth is again shown to raise per capita incomes, with income increases finally having significant poverty-reducing effects. With an aggregate rate of return of 55%, the payoffs to agricultural research are also impressive. Agricultural research currently reduces the number of poor by 2.3 million or 0.8% annually. While the actual impacts are not large enough to more than offset the poverty-increasing effects of population growth and environmental degradation, the potential impacts of agricultural research are far greater. Apart from low research investments, SSA faces several constraints outside the research system that hinder realization of potential research benefits. The results show that doubling research investments in SSA would reduce poverty by 9% annually. However, this would not be realized without more efficient extension, credit, and input supply systems.
Sublibrary:
Evaluation
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page