Applying Theory of Change in research program planning: Lessons from CGIAR

cg.contactbrian.belcher@royalroads.caen_US
cg.contributor.centerInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas - ICARDAen_US
cg.contributor.centerInternational Potato Center - CIPen_US
cg.contributor.centerIndependent / Not associateden_US
cg.contributor.centerRoyal Roads Universityen_US
cg.contributor.funderInternational Potato Center - CIPen_US
cg.contributor.funderCGIAR System Organization - CGIARen_US
cg.contributor.funderRoyal Roads Universityen_US
cg.contributor.projectICARDA Corporate - Monitoring & Evaluationen_US
cg.contributor.project-lead-instituteInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas - ICARDAen_US
cg.creator.idBonaiuti, Enrico: 0000-0002-4010-4141en_US
cg.creator.idPhilip Craven Thiele, Graham: 0000-0002-3739-0431en_US
cg.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103850en_US
cg.isijournalISI Journalen_US
cg.issn1462-9011en_US
cg.journalEnvironmental Science and Policyen_US
cg.subject.agrovoctheory of changeen_US
cg.subject.agrovocresearch-for-developmenten_US
cg.subject.agrovocresearch evaluationen_US
cg.volume160en_US
dc.contributorBonaiuti, Enricoen_US
dc.contributorPhilip Craven Thiele, Grahamen_US
dc.creatorBelcher, Brianen_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-30T15:43:17Z
dc.date.available2024-07-30T15:43:17Z
dc.description.abstractTheory of Change (ToC) is widely used as a tool to support strategic planning, monitoring, and evaluation in many fields, especially for social and environmental programs. However, there is still limited documented experience with the application and use of ToC in a research context. CGIAR, a global network of 15 centers conducting international research-for-development, included a standardized ToC approach in a recent round of developing 32 large research Initiatives. This unique experience offers an ideal opportunity to learn from organization-scale ToC implementation and use. The paper provides an overview of research-for-development challenges and ToC concepts and a brief history of ToC use in CGIAR. We describe the application of ToC in this recent case and then assess strengths and weaknesses of the process and the ToCs developed as part of the Initiative proposals. CGIAR made important advances in standardizing ToC concepts and terminology, tools, and guidance, and in integrating ToC into annual reporting and evaluation. Nevertheless, many of the ToCs were insufficiently clear and specific, with substantial scope for further improvement. This is due in part to the rushed and decentralized proposal development process, undertaken during pandemic restrictions, but also reflects different mental-models of research-for-development processes and gaps in understanding and capacity. Recommendations to improve development and use of ToC include capacity development in conceptualizing research impact pathways, ensuring that research design teams have a dedicated M&E specialist paying particular attention to ToCs, improved ToC templates, and better accountability for ToC development and use over the life of a program.en_US
dc.formatPDFen_US
dc.identifierhttps://mel.cgiar.org/reporting/downloadmelspace/hash/074e10dcdc1b832b9ece21c0f6bac355en_US
dc.identifier.citationBrian Belcher, Enrico Bonaiuti, Graham Philip Craven Thiele. (27/7/2024). Applying Theory of Change in research program planning: Lessons from CGIAR. Environmental Science and Policy, 160.en_US
dc.identifier.statusOpen accessen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/69440
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier (12 months)en_US
dc.rightsCC-BY-NC-ND-4.0en_US
dc.sourceEnvironmental Science and Policy;160,(2024)en_US
dc.subjectresearch planningen_US
dc.titleApplying Theory of Change in research program planning: Lessons from CGIARen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dcterms.available2024-07-27en_US
mel.impact-factor4.9en_US

Files