Abstract
Agricultural research oriented towards developmental goals, such as poverty alleviation, better nutrition and environmental sustainability, is challenging for monitoring and evaluation. The causal chains are long, indirect and not well understood. CGIAR, a system of independent agricultural research centres with a mission to agricultural development, has a long history of evaluation and other mechanisms of accountability. The purpose of this article is to analyse the role and utility of independent evaluation in CGIAR over two decades during which the system established a programmatic approach to research and underwent governance changes. The key findings are (i) during the historic period when evaluation of research centres was the primary mechanism of accountability to donors and of improvement of research and management at centres, evaluations were used for their intended purposes and were important for the credibility of CGIAR; (ii) evaluation of programmes in networked systems of institutions revealed challenges related to divided management responsibilities and variance in contribution and performance among partners; (iii) systematic oversight of evaluations and implementation of their recommendations by CGIAR’s highest decision-makers, the donor governance body, has diminished over time thus influencing evaluation effectiveness; and (iv) fragmented, projectized funding has generated parallel accountability mechanisms used by individual donors aside with CGIAR’s centrally designed mechanisms. We conclude that independent evaluation remains a valuable, strategic tool for complementing indicator-based performance management focused on short-term results on one hand and impact assessment of past research on the other hand. It is needed to address qualitative and context-specific aspects of research performance, such as science and research quality and potential for effectiveness.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.