- Home
- About us
- ILAC Activities
- Resources
- ILAC Publications
- ILAC Briefs
- Working Papers
- 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
- Reports
- Journal Articles
- Newsletter
- Presentations by ILAC Team
- 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
Partial indicators of impact
Mon, 03/02/2009 - 14:27 — Cristina Sette
The following text is drawn from ISNAR (2003).
The partial indicators of impact method involve the collection of information (generally readily available) for a number of items, each of which provides some insight into the extent of the socio-economic impacts resulting from the R&D. Information may include:
- Program inputs;
- Program activities;
- Program outputs; or
- Program impacts themselves.
Once the information has been collected, it is organized and presented in a way that enables people who are reviewing the information to draw conclusions regarding the impacts of the program (and especially changes in the impacts over time). For example:
- Percentage of projects completed during the past year for which the technical goals were met (or exceeded);
- The number of products developed during the past five years that are being further developed or marketed by industry; and
- The percentage of projects completed within the past year for which it is highly likely that the results will be ultimately used by the industry (this one requires and external assessment).
Advantages of Partial Indicators of Impact
The major advantage of using the partial indicators of impact method is that the information required to specify the indicators is relatively easy to collect.
Disadvantages of Partial Indicators of Impact
The partial indicators of impact method provide only a very partial picture. While this can be useful for program monitoring purposes, it is generally not sufficient for demonstrating the impact of R&D, or even understanding what they have been.
Suitability of Partial Indicators of Impact
The partial indicators of impact are the appropriate method for assessing past on-going and future R&D. It is heavily used in monitoring of on-going R&D projects and programs. The partial indicators of impact method is the best method for more fundamental R&D and for R&D oriented toward the development and maintenance of research infrastructures.
Source: ISNAR (2003) Monitoring, Evaluation, and Impact Assessment of R&D Investments in Agriculture, The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page