Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
  • Who we are
  • News
  • Events
  • Publications
  • Search

Secondary Menu

  • Independent Science for Development CouncilISDC
    • Who we are
    • News
    • Events
    • Publications
    • Featured Projects
      • Inclusive Innovation
        • Agricultural Systems Special Issue
      • Proposal Reviews
        • 2025-30 Portfolio
        • Reform Advice
      • Foresight & Trade-Offs
        • Megatrends
      • QoR4D
      • Comparative Advantage
  • Standing Panel on Impact AssessmentSPIA
    • About
      • Who We Are
      • Our Mandate
      • Impact Assessment Focal Points
      • SPIA Affiliates Network
    • Our Work
      • Country Studies
        • Community of Practice
        • Bangladesh Study
        • Ethiopia Study
        • Uganda Study
        • Vietnam Study
      • Causal Impact Assessment
        • Call for Expressions of Interest: Accountability and Learning Impact Studies
      • Use of Evidence
      • Cross-Cutting Areas
        • Capacity Strengthening
        • Methods and Measurement
        • Guidance to IDTs
    • Resources
      • Publications
      • Blog Series on Qualitative Methods for Impact Assessment
      • SPIA-emLab Agricultural Interventions Database
    • Activities
      • News
      • Events
      • Webinars
  • Evaluation
    • Who we are
    • News
    • Events
    • Publications
    • Evaluations
      • Science Group Evaluations
      • Platform Evaluations
        • CGIAR Genebank Platform Evaluation
        • CGIAR GENDER Platform Evaluation
        • CGIAR Excellence in Breeding Platform
        • CGIAR Platform for Big Data in Agriculture
    • Framework and Policy
      • Evaluation Method Notes Resource Hub
      • Management Engagement and Response Resource Hub
      • Evaluating Quality of Science for Sustainable Development
      • Evaluability Assessments – Enhancing Pathway to Impact
      • Evaluation Guidelines
  • Independent Science for Development CouncilISDC
  • Standing Panel on Impact AssessmentSPIA
  • Evaluation
Back to IAES Main Menu

Secondary Menu

  • About
    • Who We Are
    • Our Mandate
    • Impact Assessment Focal Points
    • SPIA Affiliates Network
  • Our Work
    • Country Studies
      • Community of Practice
      • Bangladesh Study
      • Ethiopia Study
      • Uganda Study
      • Vietnam Study
    • Causal Impact Assessment
      • Call for Expressions of Interest: Accountability and Learning Impact Studies
    • Use of Evidence
    • Cross-Cutting Areas
      • Capacity Strengthening
      • Methods and Measurement
      • Guidance to IDTs
  • Resources
    • Publications
    • Blog Series on Qualitative Methods for Impact Assessment
    • SPIA-emLab Agricultural Interventions Database
  • Activities
    • News
    • Events
    • Webinars
ILRI
Blog

Taking A National-Level Approach to Impact Assessment in Ethiopia

You are here

  • Home
  • Standing Panel on Impact AssessmentSPIA
  • News
  • Taking A National-Level Approach to Impact Assessment in Ethiopia

SPIA Member, J.V. Meenakshi, Professor of Agricultural Economics and Health Economics at the Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, India, teaches courses in econometrics and food and agricultural policy. In this guest blog, she explains why she sees the recently published report Shining a Brighter Light: Comprehensive Evidence on Adoption and Diffusion of CGIAR-related Innovations in Ethiopia as a textbook example of how to document adoption and diffusion of innovations at scale.

Perhaps like no other comparable set of institutions, CGIAR is held to a high standard of accountability: about whether the innovations that its scientists help create (a) are actually taken up by its stakeholders, if so which, by how many, and (b) make a difference to the livelihoods and lives of those who do adopt these innovations. While many studies attempt to answer some of these questions, they are often small-scale in nature, either in terms of their geographic specificity or in the set of innovations they consider. In contrast, this report is the first of its kind to document answers to the first set of questions at the national level and for the CGIAR System as a whole.

Several features of the report make it distinctive; all features that are worth emulating. These include, but are not limited to:

  • Collating and compiling an exhaustive set of innovations that span across crop and animal breeding to natural resource management and policy advice.
  • Documenting and justifying the degree to which these innovations can be attributed to CGIAR—noting that the number of innovations with CGIAR input far exceeds the number that were deployed, and explicitly acknowledging the multiplicity of actors it takes to ensure widespread dissemination.
  • Methodically choosing appropriate metrics to assess diffusion, based on rigorous research as well as pre-testing of survey instruments. Indeed, the report contributes a great deal to the emerging literature on the role of measurement error in influencing inference even when the methods used are causal. These metrics straddle the entire spectrum from DNA fingerprinting as the benchmark to identify improved varieties, to quantifying often-intangible conservation agriculture innovations.
  • Explicitly addressing whether diffusion rates are localized to regions in the physical proximity of CGIAR centers and projects—the report establishes that they are indeed far from being localized with a small number of innovations reaching a significant scale.
  • Highlighting the heterogeneity in diffusion, by type of innovation and characteristics of those reached. Apart from the small- versus large- farmer lens to assess equity in access to technology, the report examines how the gender of the plot manager is correlated with adoption of different innovations (adoption of improved poultry being positively correlated with female management, for example)
  • Exploiting synergies from collaborations with international and national statistical agencies to produce the evidence base. This report is ample evidence that such collaborations constitute a win-win for all development partners, so long as a high level of logistical, managerial, and technical skills can be brought to bear. The approach the team took is very challenging and is surely not possible everywhere.

I could continue in a similar vein. Rather than moving on to discuss the rich set of conclusions and its implications, let me simply say this: the compilation of evidence reported here is a textbook example of how to document diffusion at scale, and is a quite unique contribution.

Visit the webpage to read the report and find out more.

Share on

Impact SPIA
Nov 10, 2020

Written by

  • J. V. Meenakshi

    SPIA Member

Related News

Posted on
15 May 2025
by

Research Officer – Data Systems SPIA Country Studies

Posted on
28 Apr 2025
by
  • Tanguy Bernard
  • Nefisa Zekaria
  • Kalaeb Baye
  • ADD in Ethiopia team

ADD-IN Ethiopia - Insights from the kick-off meeting

Posted on
23 Apr 2025
by
  • Sujata Visaria
  • Paula Lozano-Ortiz

Reflections from Science Week: SPIA’s Latest Insights on Agricultural Innovation and Impact

More News

Related Publications

Reference Materials
Impact SPIA
Issued on 2025

SPIA Uganda Report 2025: Agricultural Diversity Under Stress

Briefs
Impact SPIA
Issued on 2025

SPIA Brief Bangladesh Report 2025

cover
Evaluation Reports & Reviews
Impact SPIA
Issued on 2025

Evaluation of SPIA’s 2019-2024 Program of Work: Final report

More publications

CGIAR Independent Advisory and Evaluation Service (IAES)

Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT
Via di San Domenico,1
00153 Rome, Italy
  • IAES@cgiar.org
  • (39-06) 61181

Follow Us

  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
JOIN OUR MAILING LIST
  • Terms and conditions
  • © CGIAR 2025

IAES provides operational support as the secretariat for the Independent Science for Development Council and the Standing Panel on Impact Assessment, and implements CGIAR’s multi-year, independent evaluation plan as approved by the CGIAR’s System Council.