Using theories of change in the CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health

Abstract

Theories of change are increasingly being discussed and referenced in development evaluation even while the elements of what a theory of change consist of differ widely among applications. Equally, examples of actual use of theories of change other than as overview illustrations of interventions are rare. In this article, we present generic models of theories of change for both straightforward and more complex interventions. A number of examples of evidence-based theories of change in the area of agriculture research for nutrition and health are discussed, as is the need for different versions of a theory of change for different purposes. We also discuss the use and analysis of these models in the planning, managing and assessing of research-related interventions, illustrating the practical usefulness of well-developed theories of change.

Keywords

complex interventions impact pathway international agricultural research for development nutrition-sensitive agriculture theory of change

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

(2012) Scaling up development results: A literature review and implications for Australia’s aid program. Canberra: AusAID, Office of Development Effectiveness. Available at: http://www.ode.ausaid.gov.au/current_work/documents/scalingupdevelopmentresults.pdf.

Andrews

Pritchett

Woolcock

(2013) Escaping capability traps through problem-driven iterative adaptation (PDIA). World Development 51(November): 234–44. Available at: http://international.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/1426292_file_Andrews_Pritchett_Woolcock_traps_FINAL_0.pdf.

Bandyopadhyay

Cotty

(2013) Biological controls for aflatoxin reductions. Aflatoxins: Finding solutions for improved food safety. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/utils/getfile/collection/p15738coll2/id/127857/filename/128068.pdf.

Barder

Ramalingam

(2012) Complexity, adaptation, and results. Global Development: Views from the Center. Centre for Global Development. Available at: http://blogs.cgdev.org/globaldevelopment/2012/09/complexity-and-results.php.

Barnett

Gregorowski

(2013) Learning about theories of change for the monitoring and evaluation of research uptake. IDS Practice Paper in Brief. Institute of Development Studies. Available at: http://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/123456789/2995/PP InBrief 14 FINAL.pdf?sequence=1.

Bennett

Rockwell

(1995) Targeting Outcomes for Programs: A Hierarchy for Targeting Outcomes and Evaluating their Achievement. University of Nebraska. Available at: ftp://bsesrv214.bse.vt.edu/grisso/Program_Logic/Targeting_Outcome_Programming.pdf.

Biggs

Farrell

Lawrence

. (2014) A practical example of Contribution Analysis to a public health intervention. Evaluation 20(2): 214–29.

Blamey

Mackenzie

(2007) Theories of change and realistic evaluation. Evaluation 13(4): 439–55.

Brousselle

Champagne

(2011) Program theory evaluation: Logic analysis. Evaluation and Program Planning 34: 69–78.

10.

Brouselle

Contandriopoulus

Lemire

(2009) Using logic analysis to evaluate knowledge transfer initiatives: The case of the research collective on the organization of primary care services. Evaluation 14(2): 165–83.

11.

Cartwright

Hardie

(2012) Evidence-based Policy: Doing It Better. A Practical Guide to Predicting If a Policy Will Work for You. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

12.

Douthwaite

Alvarez

Cook

. (2007) Participatory impact pathways analysis: A practical application of program theory in research-for-development. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 22(2): 127–59.

13.

Hansen

Vedung

(2010) Theory-based stakeholder evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation 31(3): 295–313.

14.

Hartmann

(2012). Scaling up agricultural value chains for pro-poor development. In: Linn

(ed.), Scaling Up in Agriculture, Rural Development and Nutrition. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/126977.

15.

Hartmann

Kharas

Kohl

. (2013) Scaling Up Programs for the Rural Poor: IFAD’s Experience, Lessons and Prospects (Phase 2). IFAD. Available at: http://www.ifad.org/events/scalingup/report/e.pdf.

16.

Hermans

Naber

Enserink

(2012) An approach to design long-term monitoring and evaluation frameworks in multi-actor systems – A case in water management. Evaluation and Program Planning 35: 427–38.

17.

Hotz

Loechl

Brauw

. (2012a) A large-scale intervention to introduce orange sweet potato in rural Mozambique increases vitamin A intakes among children and women. British Journal of Nutrition 108: 163–76.

18.

Hotz

Loechl

Lubowa

. (2012b) Introduction of β-carotene–rich orange sweet potato in rural Uganda resulted in increased vitamin a intakes among children and women and improved vitamin a status among children. American Society for Nutrition 142(10): 1871–80.

19.

Independent Science and Partnership Council (2012) Strategic overview of CGIAR research programs, Part I. Theories of change and impact pathways. CGIAR.

20.

James

(2011) Theory of change review. A report commissioned by Comic Relief. Comic Relief. Available at: http://mande.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012-Comic-Relief-Theory-of-Change-Review-FINAL.pdf.

21.

Johnson

Guedenet

Saltzman

(2015a) What will it take for biofortification to have impact on the ground? Theories of change for three crop–country combinations. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1427. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129089.

22.

Johnson

Mayne

Grace

. (2015b). How Will Training Traders Contribute to Improved Food Safety in Informal Markets for Meat and Milk? A Theory of Change Analysis. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129293.

23.

Kaitibie

Omore

Rich

. (2010) Kenyan dairy policy change: Influence pathways and economic impacts. World Development 38(10): 1494–505.

24.

Leeuw

(2003) Reconstructing program theories: Methods available and problems to be solved. American Journal of Evaluation 24(1): 5–20.

25.

Leeuw

(2012) Linking theory-based evaluation and contribution analysis: Three problems and a few solutions. Evaluation 18(3): 348–63.

26.

Ling

(2012) Evaluating complex and unfolding interventions in real time. Evaluation 18(1): 79–91.

27.

Linn

(2012a) Lessons on scaling up: Opportunities and challenges for the future. In: Linn

(ed.), Scaling Up in Agriculture, Rural Development, and Nutrition. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

28.

Linn

(ed.) (2012b) Scaling Up in Agriculture, Rural Development, and Nutrition. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/126977.

29.

Linn

Hartmann

Kharas

. (2010) Scaling Up the Fight Against Rural Poverty: An Institutional Review of IFAD’s Approach. Brookings Institute. Available at: http://www.ifad.org/events/scalingup/report/e.pdf.

30.

MacKenzie

(2014) National and international standards and regulatory issues for biofortification. The 2nd Global Conference on Biofortification: Getting Nutritious Foods to People. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)-Harvest Plus. Available at: http://biofortconf.ifpri.info/files/2014/03/15_Standards_MacKenzie.pdf.

31.

Mayne

(2012a) Contribution analysis: Coming of age? Evaluation 18(3): 270–80.

32.

Mayne

(2012b) Making Casual Claims. Rome, Italy: The Institutional Learning and Change Initiative. Available at: http://www.cgiar-ilac.org/files/publications/mayne_making_causal_claims_ilac_brief_26.pdf.

33.

Mayne

(2014) Using theories of reach to enhance equity considerations in evaluation. In: Forss

Marra

(eds), Speaking Justice to Power: Ethical and Methodological Challenges for Evaluators. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

34.

Mayne

(2015) Useful theory of change models. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 30(2).

35.

Mayne

Stern

(2013) Impact evaluation of natural resource research programs: A broader view. ACIAR Impact Assessment Series Report No. 84. Canberra: Australian Centre for International Agriculture Research (ACIAR). Available at: http://aciar.gov.au/publication/ias084.

36.

Mayne

Stern

Douthwaite

(2013) Evaluating natural resource management programs. Practice Brief. Penang, Malaysia: CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Available at: http://aas.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/publications/files/AAS-2013-23.pdf.

37.

Mbabu

Hall

(2012) Capacity building for agricultural research for development. Maastricht: the Netherlands: United Nations University-Maastricht Economic and social research and training centre on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT).

38.

Meenakshi

Johnson

Manyong

. (2010) How cost-effective is biofortification in combating micronutrient malnutrition? An ex ante assessment. World Development 38(1): 64–75.

39.

Montague

Porteous

(2013) The case for including reach as a key element of program theory. Evaluation and Program Planning 36: 177–83.

40.

Nestel

Bouis

Meenakshi

. (2006) Biofortification of staple food crops. The Journal of Nutrition 136(4): 1064–7. Available at: http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/4/1064.full.

41.

Pawson

Sridharan

(2009) Theory-driven evaluation of public health programmes. In: Killoran

Kelly

(eds), Evidence-Based Public Health: Effectiveness and Efficiency. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 43–62.

42.

Roesel

Grace

(2015) Food Safety and Informal Markets: Animal Products in Sub-Saharan Africa. London: Routledge. Available at: https://www.routledge.com/products/9781138818736.

43.

Rogers

(2007) Theory-based evaluations: Reflections ten years on. New Directions for Evaluation 114: 63–7.

44.

Rogers

(2008) Using programme theory to evaluate complicated and complex aspects of interventions. Evaluation 14(1): 29–48.

45.

Stame

(2004) Theory-based evaluation and varieties of complexity. Evaluation 10(1): 58–76.

46.

Stein

Valters

(2012) Understanding ‘Theory of Change’ in International Development: A Review ofExisting Knowledge. London: The Asian Institute and the Justice and Security Research Programme. Available at: http://www2.lse.ac.uk/internationalDevelopment/research/JSRP/downloads/ToC_Lit_Review.pdf.

47.

Stern

Stame

Mayne

. (2012) Broadening the range of designs and methods for impact evaluations. DFID Working Paper 38. London: DFID Available at: http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/Output/189575/.

48.

Treasury Board Secretariat (2012) Theory-Based Approaches to Evaluation: Concepts and Practices. Available at: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/cee/tbae-aeat/tbae-aeat-eng.pdf.

49.

UNEG (2013) Impact evaluation in UN agency evaluation systems: Guidance on selection, planning and management. Guidance Document. Available at: http://www.uneval.org/papersandpubs/documentdetail.jsp?doc_id=1433

50.

Unnevehr

Grace

(eds) (2013) Aflatoxins: Finding Solutions for Improved Food Safety. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/127857.

51.

Uusikylä

Valovirta

(2007) Three spheres of performance governance: Spanning the boundaries from single-organisation focus towards a partnership network. Evaluation 13(4): 399–419.

52.

Vaessen

Leeuw

(2009) Interventions as theories: Closing the gap between evaluation and the disciplines? In: Vaessen

Leeuw

(eds), Mind the Gap: Perspectives on Policy Evaluation and the Disciplines. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 141–70.

53.

Vogel

(2012a) ESPA Guide to Working with Theory of Change for Research Projects. Ecosystem Services for Alleviation of Poverty. Available at: http://www.espa.ac.uk/files/espa/ESPA-Theory-of-Change-Manual-FINAL.pdf.

54.

Vogel

(2012b) Review of the Use of ‘Theory of Change’ in International Development. DFID. Available at: http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/wp-content/uploads/DFID-ToC-Review_VogelV4.pdf.

55.

Weiss

(1995) Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In: Connell

Kubisch

Schorr

. (eds), New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Vol. 1. Concepts, Methods and Contexts. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute, 65–92.

56.

White

(2009) Theory-based impact evaluation: Principles and practice. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie). Available at: http://www.3ieimpact.org/admin/pdfs_papers/48.pdf.

57.

Wigboldus

Leeuwis

(2013) Towards Responsible Scaling Up and Out in Agricultural Development: An Exploration of Concepts and Principles. Centre for Development Innovation. Available at: https://www.wageningenur.nl/en/Publication-details.htm?publicationId=publication-way-343439393433.