在研究计划规划中应用变革理论:国际农业研究磋商组织的经验教训

IF 4.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Science & Policy Pub Date : 2024-07-27 DOI:10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103850
Brian M. Belcher , Enrico Bonaiuti , Graham Thiele
{"title":"在研究计划规划中应用变革理论:国际农业研究磋商组织的经验教训","authors":"Brian M. Belcher ,&nbsp;Enrico Bonaiuti ,&nbsp;Graham Thiele","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Theory 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&amp;E specialist paying particular attention to ToCs, improved ToC templates, and better accountability for ToC development and use over the life of a program.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"160 ","pages":"Article 103850"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901124001849/pdfft?md5=6218681bf3a77af8760c9db18aa0b81d&pid=1-s2.0-S1462901124001849-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Applying Theory of Change in research program planning: Lessons from CGIAR\",\"authors\":\"Brian M. Belcher ,&nbsp;Enrico Bonaiuti ,&nbsp;Graham Thiele\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103850\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Theory 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&amp;E specialist paying particular attention to ToCs, improved ToC templates, and better accountability for ToC development and use over the life of a program.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"volume\":\"160 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103850\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901124001849/pdfft?md5=6218681bf3a77af8760c9db18aa0b81d&pid=1-s2.0-S1462901124001849-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901124001849\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901124001849","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

变革理论(ToC)作为一种工具被广泛应用于许多领域,尤其是社会和环境项目的战略规划、监测和评估。然而,在研究领域应用和使用变革理论的文献经验仍然有限。国际农业研究磋商组织(CGIAR)是一个由 15 个开展国际发展研究的中心组成的全球网络,在最近一轮制定 32 个大型研究计划的工作中采用了标准化的 ToC 方法。这一独特的经验为我们提供了一个从组织规模的 ToC 实施和使用中学习的理想机会。本文概述了以研究促发展所面临的挑战和 ToC 概念,并简要介绍了 ToC 在国际农业研究磋商组织(CGIAR)中的应用历史。我们描述了 ToC 在最近案例中的应用,然后评估了该过程以及作为倡议提案一部分而开发的 ToC 的优缺点。国际农业研究磋商组织(CGIAR)在标准化 ToC 概念和术语、工具和指导,以及将 ToC 纳入年度报告和评估方面取得了重要进展。然而,许多 ToC 还不够明确和具体,有很大的改进余地。这部分是由于在大流行病限制期间匆忙和分散的提案制定过程造成的,但也反映了以研究促发展过程的不同思维模式以及在理解和能力方面的差距。改善 ToC 的开发和使用的建议包括:培养研究影响途径概念化方面的能力,确保研究设计团队有专门的 M&E 专家特别关注 ToC,改进 ToC 模板,以及在整个计划期间加强 ToC 开发和使用的问责制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Applying Theory of Change in research program planning: Lessons from CGIAR

Theory 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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Forest owners’ perceptions of machine learning: Insights from swedish forestry Understanding how landscape value and climate risk discourses can improve adaptation planning: Insights from Q-method Articulating futures: Community storylines and assisted ecosystem adaptation in the Great Barrier Reef Insights into the public engagement of coastal geoscientists Flood data platform governance: Identifying the technological and socio-technical approach(es) differences
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1