- 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
Rural innovation systems and networks : Findings from a study of Ethiopian smallholders
Sun, 08/31/2008 - 12:52 — Cristina Sette
Publication Type:
MiscellaneousSource:
IFPRI Discussion Paper 759, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, D.C. (2008)Keywords:
agricultural development; Ethiopia; Innovation; social learning; Social Networks; TechnologyAbstract:
Agriculture in Ethiopia is changing. New players, relationships, and policies are influencing how smallholders access and use information and knowledge. Although this growing complexity suggests opportunities for Ethiopian smallholders, too little is known about how these opportunities can be effectively leveraged to promote pro-poor processes of rural innovation. This paper examines Ethiopia's smallholder agricultural sector to provide qualitative insights into the interactions between smallholders and other actors in the agricultural sector and the contribution those interactions make to the smallholders' innovation processes. Case studies of smallholder innovation networks in 10 communities suggest that public sector extension and administration exert a strong influence over smallholders' access to knowledge and information relative to market or civil society actors. Given the priority the Ethiopian government has placed on improving rural welfare by increasing market access among smallholders, the findings of this study may suggest the need to further explore policies and programs that create more space for market and civil society actors to participate in smallholder innovation networks.
Notes:
http://www.ifpri.org/pubs/dp/ifpridp00759.pdf
Sublibrary:
Innovation
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page