Measurement in agriculture
During the past year, ALINe has analysed the state of measurement in agriculture and we present our findings here. We have also included links to other useful resources about measurement plus further reading that supports our analysis.
ALINe publications
What is the state of M&E in agriculture? Findings of the ALINe online consultation survey, October 2009
Key findings are that the M&E of agricultural projects is generally considered weak and that the best way to improve M&E is to engage better with farmers and local partners.
ALINe workshop report, March 2009
Reflections on the ALINe workshop at the Perspectives on Impact Evaluation Conference in Cairo, 30 March 2009
Use of Social Media to Share Knowledge on Agricultural Impact, Planning, Assessment And Learning, December 2009
A desk-based study for ALINe on how social media could contribute to sharing knowledge on agricultural Impact, Planning, Assessment and Learning (IPAL).
M&E Theory and Practice (forthcoming)
This paper explores recent debates in M&E theory and practice and makes recommendations for measurement in agriculture.
The state of measurement in agriculture (forthcoming)
This paper will provide an overview of ALINe's analysis of measurement in agriculture.
Useful links
The International Initiative on Impact Evaluation (3ie) seeks to improve the lives of poor people in low- and middle-income countries by providing, and summarizing, evidence of what works, when, why and for how much.
African Evaluation Association (AfrEA) is an umbrella organisation for more than 20 national M&E associations and networks in Africa.
Monitoring and Evaluation News (MandE News) is a news service focusing on developments in monitoring and evaluation methods relevant to development programmes with social development objectives
Related research
Barder, O. (2009) Beyond Planning: Markets and Networks for Better Aid. CGD Working Paper 185. Washington: CGD
Benin, S., Kennedy, A., Lambert, M., McBride, L. (2010) Monitoring African agricultural development processes and performance: A comparative analysis. ReSAKSS Annual Trends and Outlook Report 2010. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
Björkman, M and Svensson, J. (2009) 'Power to the People: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment on Community Based Monitoring in Uganda’. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol 124: 2. pp 735-769
Brett, E. A. (2000) ‘Understanding organisations and institutions’, in Robinson, D. et al. (eds.) Managing Development: Understanding Inter-Organizational Relationships, London: Sage for the Open University
Isham, J., Narayan, D. and Pritchett, L. (1994) ‘Does participation improve project performance : establishing causality with subjective data’. Policy Research Working Paper Series 1357. The World Bank.
Johnson, C. (2001) ‘Towards accountability: Narrowing the gap between NGO priorities and local realities in Thailand’. ODI Working Paper 149. London:ODI
Kusters, C.S.L. et al. (2011) 'Making evaluations matter: A practical guide for evaluators', Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen University & Research centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Munce, K. (2005) ‘As good as it gets? Projects that make a difference: the role of monitoring and evaluation’, University of Western Sydney, Australia
Platteau, J-P. (2007) 'Pitfalls of participatory development', CRED Working Paper 2007/03
Scoones, I. and Thompson, T. (eds.) (2009) Farmer First Revisited – innovation for Agricultural Research and Development, Oxford: ITDG Publishing
