保护性农业是如何规模化发展的?

Ricardo Ramirez, C. Neudoerffer, M. Salomons
{"title":"保护性农业是如何规模化发展的?","authors":"Ricardo Ramirez, C. Neudoerffer, M. Salomons","doi":"10.56645/jmde.v18i42.703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background \nThe Foodgrains Bank has an established record working in agriculture and food security with resource constrained, marginalized farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. The three outcome areas of the Scaling-Up Conservation Agriculture in East Africa (SUCA) Program were: the adoption of conservation agriculture systems, an enabling institutional environment, and the promotion of enabling policies. These program areas were expected to yield intermediate outcomes that, together, would lead to the ultimate outcome of improved food security and sustainable livelihoods for smallholder farming households in East Africa. This case study reports on the end-line evaluation of the five-year program. \nPurpose \nTo illustrate the overlap between utilization-focused evaluation (UFE) and collaborative approaches to evaluation (CAE). The case study profiles an agricultural intervention, and explores how the evaluation design accommodated the systemic nature of the program. \nSetting \nScaling-Up Conservation Agriculture in East Africa (SUCA) was a five-year program of the Canadian Foodgrains Bank implemented from 2015-2020 to expand the size and scope of Foodgrains Bank’s work in conservation agriculture in East Africa. The program supported local partners with a target of 50,000 male and female farmers practicing a minimum of 2 of 3 conservation agriculture principles, and to improve food security and sustainable livelihoods for 18,000 of these farmers’ households across three countries.  \nResearch design \nThe Foodgrains Bank was directly involved in the evaluation design through the definition of evaluation uses and key evaluation questions. Eleven implementing partners in East Africa were involved in primary data collection and some initial analysis. \nData collection and analysis \nA mixed method approach was used combining quantitative, qualitative, and participatory / visual data collection tools. A robust, intersectional gender lens was applied to the data collection instruments in the form of gender disaggregated data collection and gender-focused questions across most data collection instruments.  \nFindings \nThe collaborative process confirmed a sense of ownership by the primary evaluation users over the evaluation design. The evaluation design combined outcome and learning uses that took advantages of the implementing organizations’ commitment to learning. The findings demonstrated the value of the program and produced a framework illustrating the multi-disciplinary approach underlying its success.","PeriodicalId":91909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How did conservation agriculture go to scale?\",\"authors\":\"Ricardo Ramirez, C. Neudoerffer, M. Salomons\",\"doi\":\"10.56645/jmde.v18i42.703\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background \\nThe Foodgrains Bank has an established record working in agriculture and food security with resource constrained, marginalized farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. The three outcome areas of the Scaling-Up Conservation Agriculture in East Africa (SUCA) Program were: the adoption of conservation agriculture systems, an enabling institutional environment, and the promotion of enabling policies. These program areas were expected to yield intermediate outcomes that, together, would lead to the ultimate outcome of improved food security and sustainable livelihoods for smallholder farming households in East Africa. This case study reports on the end-line evaluation of the five-year program. \\nPurpose \\nTo illustrate the overlap between utilization-focused evaluation (UFE) and collaborative approaches to evaluation (CAE). The case study profiles an agricultural intervention, and explores how the evaluation design accommodated the systemic nature of the program. \\nSetting \\nScaling-Up Conservation Agriculture in East Africa (SUCA) was a five-year program of the Canadian Foodgrains Bank implemented from 2015-2020 to expand the size and scope of Foodgrains Bank’s work in conservation agriculture in East Africa. The program supported local partners with a target of 50,000 male and female farmers practicing a minimum of 2 of 3 conservation agriculture principles, and to improve food security and sustainable livelihoods for 18,000 of these farmers’ households across three countries.  \\nResearch design \\nThe Foodgrains Bank was directly involved in the evaluation design through the definition of evaluation uses and key evaluation questions. Eleven implementing partners in East Africa were involved in primary data collection and some initial analysis. \\nData collection and analysis \\nA mixed method approach was used combining quantitative, qualitative, and participatory / visual data collection tools. A robust, intersectional gender lens was applied to the data collection instruments in the form of gender disaggregated data collection and gender-focused questions across most data collection instruments.  \\nFindings \\nThe collaborative process confirmed a sense of ownership by the primary evaluation users over the evaluation design. The evaluation design combined outcome and learning uses that took advantages of the implementing organizations’ commitment to learning. The findings demonstrated the value of the program and produced a framework illustrating the multi-disciplinary approach underlying its success.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v18i42.703\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v18i42.703","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景粮食银行在撒哈拉以南非洲地区资源受限的边缘化农民的农业和粮食安全方面有着良好的记录。东非扩大保护性农业项目(SUCA)的三个成果领域是:采用保护性农业系统、创造有利的制度环境和促进有利的政策。预计这些方案领域将产生中期成果,这些成果加在一起将导致改善东非小农家庭粮食安全和可持续生计的最终结果。本案例研究报告了五年期计划的期末评估。目的阐明以利用为中心的评价(UFE)和协同评价方法(CAE)之间的重叠。本案例研究概述了农业干预措施,并探讨了评估设计如何适应该计划的系统性。“扩大东非保护性农业”(SUCA)是加拿大粮食银行在2015-2020年期间实施的一个为期五年的项目,旨在扩大粮食银行在东非保护性农业方面的工作规模和范围。该项目为当地合作伙伴提供支持,目标是让5万名男女农民至少实践3项保护性农业原则中的2项,并改善三个国家1.8万户农民家庭的粮食安全和可持续生计。通过对评价用途和关键评价问题的界定,粮食银行直接参与了评价设计。东非的11个执行伙伴参与了初级数据收集和一些初步分析。数据收集和分析采用了定量、定性和参与式/可视化数据收集工具相结合的混合方法。以性别分类数据收集和大多数数据收集工具中以性别为重点的问题的形式,对数据收集工具应用了强有力的、交叉的性别视角。协作过程证实了初级评价使用者对评价设计的主人翁意识。评估设计结合了结果和学习使用,利用了实施组织对学习的承诺。研究结果证明了该计划的价值,并产生了一个框架,说明了其成功背后的多学科方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How did conservation agriculture go to scale?
Background The Foodgrains Bank has an established record working in agriculture and food security with resource constrained, marginalized farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. The three outcome areas of the Scaling-Up Conservation Agriculture in East Africa (SUCA) Program were: the adoption of conservation agriculture systems, an enabling institutional environment, and the promotion of enabling policies. These program areas were expected to yield intermediate outcomes that, together, would lead to the ultimate outcome of improved food security and sustainable livelihoods for smallholder farming households in East Africa. This case study reports on the end-line evaluation of the five-year program. Purpose To illustrate the overlap between utilization-focused evaluation (UFE) and collaborative approaches to evaluation (CAE). The case study profiles an agricultural intervention, and explores how the evaluation design accommodated the systemic nature of the program. Setting Scaling-Up Conservation Agriculture in East Africa (SUCA) was a five-year program of the Canadian Foodgrains Bank implemented from 2015-2020 to expand the size and scope of Foodgrains Bank’s work in conservation agriculture in East Africa. The program supported local partners with a target of 50,000 male and female farmers practicing a minimum of 2 of 3 conservation agriculture principles, and to improve food security and sustainable livelihoods for 18,000 of these farmers’ households across three countries.  Research design The Foodgrains Bank was directly involved in the evaluation design through the definition of evaluation uses and key evaluation questions. Eleven implementing partners in East Africa were involved in primary data collection and some initial analysis. Data collection and analysis A mixed method approach was used combining quantitative, qualitative, and participatory / visual data collection tools. A robust, intersectional gender lens was applied to the data collection instruments in the form of gender disaggregated data collection and gender-focused questions across most data collection instruments.  Findings The collaborative process confirmed a sense of ownership by the primary evaluation users over the evaluation design. The evaluation design combined outcome and learning uses that took advantages of the implementing organizations’ commitment to learning. The findings demonstrated the value of the program and produced a framework illustrating the multi-disciplinary approach underlying its success.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信