Giel Ton
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 26

Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 44 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Giel Ton LEI Wageningen UR. 3 rd PSD-Platform Meeting The Hague 15 June 2012. Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers. AusAid’s Review Question.

Download Presentation

Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers

Giel TonLEI Wageningen UR

3rd PSD-Platform Meeting

The Hague

15 June 2012

Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers


Ausaid s review question

AusAid’s Review Question

“the effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder agricultural producers in facilitating agricultural innovation, particularly in ways that benefit the poor and women in developing countries”

  • Fuzzy Concepts

    • Innovation grants: different treatments

    • ‘To’ smallholders: direct / indirect

    • Agricultural innovation: array of outcome indicators


Systematic review approaches

Systematic Review Approaches


Generalizing in complexity and diversity realist synthesis

Generalizing in complexity and diversity: realist synthesis

  • “Context-Mechanisms-Outcome Configurations”

  • Interventions can trigger mechanisms

  • Mechanisms are the ‘incentives’ that influence/structure the behaviour of the stakeholders involved in the value chain


Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers

  • Refinement of interventions:

    If theRIGHTprocesses operate in theRIGHTconditions then the programme will prevail

    (Pawson and Manzano-Santanella, 2012)

  • How did we use it:

    • Rephrase evaluation question: “Does it work?..... for whom, under what conditions?”

    • Exploring literature on specific innovation grant systems within a initial typology to get a more refined typology, each associated with a set of ‘good practices’


Initial typology and coding tool

Initial typology and coding tool


Inclusion exclusion criteria

Inclusion/exclusion criteria

Title-Abstract

  • Exclude on country [developing country]

  • Exclude on group of intended beneficiary [small holder agricultural producers, or agricultural service providers]

  • Exclude since no specific innovation grant, except farmer-driven research and extension [vouchers, matching grants, competitive grants. FFS, Not: credit-only interventions)

  • Exclude on sector [agriculture, agro-forestry. Not: fishery, forestry, tourism, non-agricultural service provision]

    Full-text

  • Exclude since no information on at least one characteristic of the grant system [grant governance, institutional setting, poverty context, complementary activities within project]

  • Exclude since no information on innovation context [system imperfections the grant wants to address]

  • Exclude since no information on outcomes [innovation context, smallholder livelihoods]

    Additional for Type C:

  • Exclude since no decision making by beneficiaries on innovation grant system


Evidence on impact pathways key assumptions

Evidence on impact pathways(key assumptions)


Key assumption in impact pathways

Key assumption in impact pathways

  • B1: Competitive grants trigger value-adding business activities by (organized) farmers as a way to facilitate innovation processes with smallholder farmers in markets.

  • B2: Farmers’ livelihoods improve as a result of social activities and economic returns derived from the new value-adding business activities.


Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers

Table 3 - Summary of the evidence on outcomes and impact for the impact studies of business plan support grant for smallholder innovation


B1 grants trigger value adding business activities by organized farmers

B1 -Grants trigger value-adding business activities by (organized) farmers

  • The studies on business support grants show that in the grants indeed translates into investments in technology or support services to business proposals of organized farmer groups.

  • Initial organisational social capital of the groups is a necessary precondition to develop these proposals and to handle the grants.

  • Grants tend to be a minor factor in a wider constellation of factors that make the business proposal successful. Therefore, outcomes of the grant system on organisational social capital and institutions that provide the context for further development of these business are important.

  • The necessary transparent and sustained procedures needed for business support grants places high demands on the governance system. Participation of farmer organisations in the governing body is valued positively by most authors.


B2 farmers livelihoods improve as a result

B2 - Farmers’ livelihoods improve as a result

  • The three studies that analysed the impact of the business proposals supported by these grant systems documented positive impacts on producers.

  • The changes in income through the grant supported business proposals is not necessarily attributable to the grant, and definitely not to the grant alone.

  • The methodologies used to measure most indicators suffer from the absence in research design of comparison groups or other ways of counterfactual reasoning.

  • The only study covered in the review with a counterfactual did report a neutral effect on farmer incomes


Lessons learnt

‘Lessons learnt’

  • Competitive grants

    • Risk of antagonism between (scarce) service providers in the same region

    • Low cost preference leads to low quality support packages

    • Oligopolistic behaviour and corruption in relation to fund managers

    • Need for independent institutions versus long-term sustainability: transparency and donor-control

    • Contract governance, conflict resolution and different levels of farmer influence: the role of federations

  • Business plans

    • Approved business plans in dynamic markets: need for transparent adaption mechanisms

    • Concentrate on areas/clusters where more expert knowledge is available on market dynamics: multiplicity of experiences and more developed market of service providers

    • Better suited for innovation by farmer groups in higher end markets and with comprehensive support (Chile)

  • Beware

    • Grants may undermine credit culture: ‘smart subsidies’

    • Economic farmer organisations: need for threshold levels of trust and commitment of members


Improving the initial typology

Improving the initial typology


Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers

High importance of outcomes on human/social capabilities

Business support grants

Prolinnova

Low dependence on existing human/social capabilities

CIAL

NAADS

High dependence on existing human/social capabilities

FFS

Inputvouchers

Low importance of outcomes on human/social capabilities


Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers

High importance of FOs in governance

CIAL

FFS

Prolinnova

NAADS

High importance of FOs in outcomes

Low importance of FOs in outcomes

Business support grants

Inputvouchers

Low importance of FOs in governance


Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers

Large amounts

Business support grants

NAADS

Inputvouchers

Prolinnova

CIAL

Fixed package

Free choice

FFS

Small amounts


Systematic review on effectiveness of innovation grants to smallholder producers

THE STRENGTH OF A GRANT-FUND LIES IN ITS CAPACITY TO REJECT BUSINESS PLANS NOT THE CAPACITY TO APPROVETHEM

THANK YOU!


  • Login