Development impacts of value chain interventions: How to collect credible evidence and draw valid conclusions in impact evaluations?

Journal on Chain and Network Science

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 69-84

  Ton, Giel ^a   Vellema, Sietze ^a   De Ruyter DeWildt Lei, Marieke ^a  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

attribution; mixed methods; organisational performance; realist evaluation; rural development

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959329948     PISSN: 15691829     EISSN: 22244662     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3920/JCNS2011.x188     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Bamberger, M., 2007. Simply the best? understanding the market for 'Good Practice' advice from government research and evaluations: a framework for assessing validity and utilization of evaluations. American Evaluation Association, Baltimore, MD, USA.
2. Bamberger, M., J. Rugh and L. Mabry, 2006. RealWorld evaluation: working under budget, time, data, and political constraints, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
3. Begg, C., 1994. Publication bias. The Handbook of Research Synthesis, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY, USA, 399-409.
4. Bijman, J., R. Muradian and A. Cechin, 2011. Agricultural cooperatives and value chain coordination. In: Helmsing, A.H.J. and S. Vellema (eds.) Value chains, inclusion and endogenous development: contrasting theories and realities. Routledge, New York, NY, USA.
5. Blaikie, N.W.H., 1991. A critique of the use of triangulation in social research. Quality and Quantity, 25: 115-136.
6. Blaikie, N.W.H., 2000. Designing social research: The logic of anticipation, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.
7. Blatter, J. and T. Blume, 2008. In search of co-variance, causal mechanisms or congruence? Towards a plural understanding of case studies. Swiss Political Science Review, 14: 315-356.
8. Borgen, S.O., 2004. Rethinking incentive problems in cooperative organizations. Journal of Socio-Economics, 33: 383-393. (Pubitemid 40030658)
9. Brady, H.E., D. Collier and J. Seawright, 2006. Toward a pluralistic vision of methodology. Political Analysis, 14: 353-368. (Pubitemid 43941864)
10. Byrne, D. and C. Ragin, 2009. The SAGE Handbook of Case-Based Methods, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
11. Chelimsky, E. and W.R. Shadish, 1997. Evaluation for the 21st century: a handbook. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
12. Chen, H.T., 1994. Theory-Driven Evaluations, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
13. Cook, M., 1994. The role of management behavior in agricultural cooperatives. Journal of Agricultural Cooperation, 9: 42-58.
14. Cornforth, C., 2004. The Governance of cooperatives and mutual associations: a paradox perspective. Annals of Public & Cooperative Economics, 75: 11-32.
15. Creevey, L. and M. Ndiaye, 2008. Common problems in impact assessment research. Impact Assessment Primer Series #7, USAID, Washington DC, USA.
16. Creevey, L. and G. Woller, 2006. Methodological issues in conducting impact assessments of private sector development programs. Impact Assessment Primer Series #2, USAID, Washington DC, USA.
17. DAC, 2008. Evaluating development co-operation: summary of key norms and standards, OECD, Paris, France.
18. DCED, 2010. The DCED standard for measuring achievements in private sector development: control points and compliance criteria. Version V., Donor Committee for Enterprise Development, Cambridge, UK. Available online at: http://www.enterprise-development.org/page/ measuring-and-reporting-results
19. Denzin, N.K., 1970. The research act. Aldine Transaction, London, UK.
20. Donaldson, S., C. Christie and M. Mark, 2008. What counts as credible evidence in applied research and evaluation practice?, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
21. Duflo, E., R. Glennerster, M. Kremer, L. Center and T. Floor, 2007. Chapter 61 Using randomization in development economics research: a toolkit. In: Schultz, T.P. and J.A. Strauss (eds.), Handbook of development economics, volume 4, Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, p. 3895-3962.
22. European Commission, 2008. Second Strategic Review of Better Regulation in the European Union European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.
23. Farrington, D.P., 2003. Methodological quality standards for evaluation research. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587: 49-68.
24. Gerring, J., 2008. The mechanismic worldview: thinking inside the box. British Journal of Political Science, 38: 161-179.
25. Heckman, J.J., 2005. The scientific model of causality. Sociological Methodology, 35: 1-98.
26. Heckman, J.J. and J.A. Smith, 1995. Assessing the case for social experiments. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9: 85-110.
27. Helmsing, A.H.J. and S. Vellema, 2011. Value chains, inclusion and endogenous development: contrasting theories and realities, Routledge, New York, NY, USA.
28. Hospes, O., 2008. Evaluation evolution?-three approaches to evaluation. The Broker, 2008: 24-26.
29. Humphrey, J. and L. Navas-Aleman, 2009. Multinational value chains, small and medium enterprises, and 'pro-poor' policies: a review of donor practice. IDS Research Report 63, IDS, Brighton, UK.
30. Khandker, S., B. Koolwal and H. Samad, 2009. Handbook on impact evaluation. World Bank, Washington DC, USA, 239 pp.
31. Lawson, T., 2003. Reorienting Economics, Routledge, New York, NY, USA.
32. Lawson, T., 2009. Applied economics, contrast explanation and asymmetric information. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33: 405-419.
33. Mackie, J.L., 1965. Causes and conditions. American philosophical quarterly, 245-264.
34. Maredia, M.K., 2009. Improving the proof: evolution of and emerging trends in impact assessment methods and approaches in agricultural development, IFPRI Discussion Paper 00929. IFPRI, Washington DC, USA.
35. Mill, J.S.S., 2009 (1843). System of logic ratiocinative and inductive: being a connected view of the principles of evidence and the methods of scientific investigation. Cosimo Classics, New York, NY, USA.
36. Olson, M., 1965. The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
37. Ostrom, E., 2009. Building trust to solve commons dilemmas: taking small steps to test an evolving theory of collective action. In: Leven, A.S. (ed.), Games, Groups, and the Global Good. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany, p. 207-228.
38. Pawson, R., 2002. Evidence-based Policy: The promise of 'realist synthesis'. Evaluation, 8: 340-358.
39. Pawson, R., 2003. Nothing as practical as a good theory. Evaluation, 9: 471-490.
40. Pawson, R. and N. Tilley, 1997. Realistic evaluation, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
41. Ragin, C., 2000. Fuzzy-set social science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA.
42. Ragin, C., 2008. Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA.
43. Ravallion, M., 2009. Should the Randomistas Rule? The Economists' Voice, 6: 6.
44. Rihoux, B. and C. Ragin, 2008. Configurational comparative methods. Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and related techniques (Applied Social Research Methods). Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
45. Roche, C.J.R. and C. Roche, 1999. Impact assessment for development agencies: learning to value change. Oxfam-NOVIB, London, UK.
46. Rogers, P.J., 2009. Matching impact evaluation design to the nature of the intervention and the purpose of the evaluation. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 1: 217-226.
47. Shadish, W.R., T.D. Cook and D.T. Campbell, 2002. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston, MA, USA.
48. Snodgrass, D., 2006. Assessing the impact of new generation private sector development programs. Impact Assessment Primer Series #1, USAID, Washington DC, USA.
49. Snowden, D. and M. Boone, 2007. A leader's framework for decision making. Harvard Business Review, 85: 68.
50. Tanburn, J., 2008. The 2008 reader on private sector development: measuring and reporting results. International Training Centre ILO, Turin, Italy.
51. Ton, G., 2008. Challenges for smallholder market access: a review of literature on institutional arrangements in collective marketing. Stewart Postharvest Review, 4: 1-6.
52. Ton, G., 2010. Resolving the Challenges Of Collective Marketing: incentive structures that reduce the tensions between members and their group. ESFIM Policy Brief #4, ESFIM, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
53. Ton, G., S. Taylor, J. Vlaming and S. R. C. H. Hiller, 2010. Evaluating poverty impacts of bottom-of-the-pyramid irrigation technology supply: IDE's rolling baseline approach to household income impact assessment. AEA Annual Conference 'Evaluation 2009: Context and Evaluation'. November 11-14. Orlando, Florida. Available online: http://tinyurl.com/69gdhpg
54. Vaessen, J., 2010. Methodological and conceptual challenges in evaluating the impact of development interventions. Datawyse / Universitaire Pers Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
55. Vellema, S., 2011. Transformation and sustainability in agriculture: connecting practice with social theory, Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
56. World Bank, 2007. World development report 2008: agriculture for development, World Bank, Washington DC, USA.
57. Zandniapur, L., J. Sebstad and D. Snodgrass, 2004. Review of evaluations of selected enterprise development projects. MicroREPORT #3, USAID, Washington DC, USA.