johnson a4 nh-ispc

Use of impact pathways and theories of change in A4NH:

Approach and progress to date

Nancy Johnson

ISPC Nutrition workshop Sep 22-23, IFPRI

A4NH – Results Framework

Improved diet quality

Reduced exposure to causes of ag-

associated disease

Empowerment of women and poor communities

Better cross-sector policies, programs and investments

Improved nutritional status Improved

health status CGIAR

Strategic Goals

IDOs

Biofortification

Value chains for enhanced nutrition

Integrated programs and policies

Agricultural disease risk

A4NH Research Portfolio

Value Chains Programs Policies

A4NH Impact

Pathways

Source: Adapted from A4NH Proposal

CRP Strategic Goal 1

CRP Impact Pathway 1

intermediate outcomes (enabling

environment and direct benefit

changes)

Immediate outcomes (capacity and

practice)

CRP activities and outputs

(research, capacity building and engagement )

CRP Impact Pathway 2



changes)

Immediate outcomes (capacity and

practice changes)

CRP Impact Pathway n



changes)

immediate outcomes (capacity and

practice changes)

CRP Strategic Goal 2

A CRP Results Strategy Framework

CGIAR SLOs

Source: Adapted from CRP IDO Working Group guidance

Relationship between our impact pathways and the four components (from A4NH Gender Strategy)

A4NH approach to TOC

• Approach: develop TOCs for major outputs (technologies, institutional innovations, evidence) with potential to have impact at scale

• Objectives:

– M&E of outputs of past research

– Increase impact orientation of current A4NH agenda

– Improve coordination of research

– Improve understanding of how agricultural research contributes to nutrition- and health-related outcomes

Behavior changes

Outputs

External

Influences

Capacity changes in

knowledge, attitudes,

aspirations, skills,

opportunities, & incentives

Reach & Reaction

Direct benefits

(Outcomes)

Livelihood change

(Impacts)

Activities

Generic impact pathway

Behavior changes

Outputs

External

Influences

Capacity changes in

knowledge, attitudes,

aspirations, skills,

opportunities, & incentives

Reach & Reaction

Direct benefits

(Outcomes)

Direct Benefits

Assumptions & Risks

Behavior Change

Assumptions & Risks

Capacity Change

Assumptions & Risks

Reach Assumptions &

Risks

Livelihood change

(Impacts)

Livelihood Change

Assumptions & Risks

Activities

Generic theory of change

Flagship Value chain pathway Program pathway Policy pathway

Value Chains for

Enhanced

Nutrition

Evidence from evaluations

influences design of value

chain interventions by ag

NGOs

Biofortification Varieties disseminated

through formal and

informal seed systems

Biofortified grains

disseminated through food aid

or nutrition programs

Results of research

used to influence

national nutrition and

food policy or

international food

standards (CODEX)

Agriculture

Associated

Diseases

Farm-level technologies to

mitigate aflatoxin risk in

different types of markets

Institutional innovation

for traders in informal

ASF value chains

Research results used

to influence national

and regional policy on

food safety

Integrated

Programs and

Policies

Influence of evidence from

program evaluations on

design and implementation of

integrated agriculture-

nutrition programs

implemented by NGOs

Evidence from

evaluation used to

influence government

and donor policies

Some examples of possible TOCs by flagship and pathway

Flagship Value chain pathway Program pathway Policy pathway

Value Chains

for Enhanced

Nutrition

Evidence from

evaluations influences

design of value chain

interventions by NGOs

Biofortification Varieties disseminated

through formal and

informal seed systems—

Beans in Rwanda,

Cassava in Nigeria, Maize

in Zambia

Biofortified grains

disseminated through food

aid or nutrition programs

Results of research

used to influence

national nutrition and

food policy or

international food

standards (CODEX)

Agriculture

Associated

Diseases

Farm-level technologies

to mitigate aflatoxin risk

Research results used

to influence national

and regional policy on

food safety

regulations

Institutional innovation

for traders in ASF value

chains

Integrated

Programs and

Policies

Influence of evidence from

program evaluations on

design and implementation

of integrated agriculture-

nutrition programs

implemented by NGOs

Evidence from

evaluation used to

influence government

and donor policy

2011

Cassava Provitamin A DR Congo, Nigeria

2012

Beans Iron (Zinc) DR Congo, Rwanda

2012

Maize Provitamin A Zambia

2012

Pearl Millet Iron (Zinc) India

2013

Rice Zinc Bangladesh, India

2013

Wheat Zinc India, Pakistan

2003

*GOAL: delivery-at-scale to 25 million people from 8 target countries

2018

Discovery Development Delivery

2008 2013

2007

Sweet Potato Provitamin A Uganda Mozambique

Generic impact pathway for HarvestPlus delivery in target countries

Consumers consume biofortified crops and food products

Farmers adopt biofortified varieties

External

Influences Market agents buy

and use biofortified

varieties

Reduced prevalence of inadequate micronutrient intake (IDO)

Reduced prevalence of micronutrient deficiencies

Seed systems supply biofortified varieties

HarvestPlus multiplication, dissemination and marketing activities

Source: Johnson, Guedenet, Saltzman, 2014

What do we know about these outcomes?



External



varieties




Harvest Plus dissemination, multiplication and marketing activities

Well documented in efficacy studies



External



varieties





Documented in OSP impact evaluation, more planned

What can we learn from delivery at scale?



Market agents buy


varieties







Market agents buy


varieties





Some assumptions/ risks Consumers willing to consume biofortified crops/products Crops/products available and accessible to the person(s) responsible for food consumption decisions in target households Market agents target better off households

What do we know about the outcomes in the middle of the pathway?



Market agents buy


varieties





Assumption/risk Consumers willing to consume biofortified crops/products Crops/products available and accessible to the person(s) responsible for food consumption decisions in target households Market agents target better off households



Market agents buy


varieties





Assumptions/ Risks Biofortified crops meet market agent requirements Decision maker(s) in target farm households sell rather than consume biofortified crops

Consumers (who may be farmers or members of farm

households consume biofortified crops and food products


Market agents buy


varieties





Assumptions/ Risks Biofortified crops meet market agent requirements Decision maker(s) in farm households sell rather than consume biofortified crops

Generic impact pathway for HarvestPlus delivery in target countries




Market agents buy


varieties





Assumptions/ Risks Seed available and no barriers or disincentives to adoption (e.g., price of hybrid seed) by target farmers Crops deliver expected benefits to farm households




Market agents buy


varieties





Assumptions/ Risks Seed available and no barriers or disincentives to adoption (e.g., price of hybrid seed) Crops deliver expected benefits in farm households

Summary – HarvestPlus delivery

• During first two phases HarvestPlus provided a very good example of impact orientation—working in parallel across breeding, nutrition, social science to develop varieties and build case for potential impact

• Phase 3 offers an opportunity to learn about delivery at scale – Monitoring, learning and action (MLA) team works in

each target country – Opportunities to embed research in delivery (eg

testing different approaches)

Example 2 – “Training, certification and branding scheme” to improve food safety in informal markets

for animal source foods

• Grew out of smallholder dairy work in Kenya: research-> policy change-> economic impacts

• New policy included upgrading of traders in informal markets to improve quality and safety of milk

• Incentive-based scheme involved training and certification.

• Can this model be adapted to other countries and ASF value chains?

Source: Omore and Baker (2011)

Improved diet quality

More, safer milk, meat and fish consumed by target beneficiaries

Increased quality of animal products sold

Women maintain or increase control of dairy income and assets

ToC Producer

Supply

ToC Gender

Reduced exposure to food borne diseases

ToC Enabling Environment

More equitable distribution of the

benefits from quality animal products

ToC Trader Supply

Nutrition IDO

Income IDO Productivity IDO Environment IDO

Gender IDO

Policy IDO

Overview impact pathway for improving nutrition and health in livestock value chains

Health IDO

ToC consumption

Source: Mayne, Johnson, Grace and Wyatt , 2014

Reach/Reaction: Traders hear about training, branding and certification

Research activities & outputs

Capacity changes: Traders learn product quality and business skills, branding and certification

Increased consumption of safe meat, milk and fish by target consumers (reduced exposure per unit consumed)

Practice changes: Traders acquire certification and improve safety practices

Quality of product sold improves

ToC consumption

Certification program

Branding campaign

Trader training

Reach/Reaction: Consumers hear about the branding

Capacity changes: Consumers learn about the branding

Practice changes: Consumers respond to the branding

Practice changes: Traders work with producers to improve safety practices

ToC

Producers

ToC Enabling

Environment

Generic Trader Supply ToC ToC

gender







ToC consumption


Branding campaign

Trader training





ToC

Producers

ToC Enabling

Environment

Generic Trader Supply ToC ToC

gender

Evidence from pilots in different countries and value chains shows that schemes can reach a large share of traders and improve knowledge and practice, resulting in improved milk quality







ToC consumption


Branding campaign

Trader training





ToC

Producers

ToC Enabling

Environment

What do we need to know?

Where are these types of schemes likely to work and why?

How can schemes be implemented at scale?







ToC consumption


Branding campaign

Trader training





ToC

Producers

ToC Enabling

Environment


Assumptions Traders have incentives to get trained, get certified and implement changes in practice







ToC consumption


Branding campaign

Trader training





ToC

Producers

ToC Enabling

Environment


Assumptions Consumers are willing to pay a premium for certified, branded food Consumers are concern about food safety Consumers trust branding scheme







ToC consumption


Branding campaign

Trader training





ToC

Producers

ToC Enabling

Environment


Assumptions Competent partners deliver the training and branding Government supports certification There are adequate incentives and the means to offer a certification program

Summary- Training, certification and branding scheme

• TOC process clarified within A4NH team what the expect output of the research was

– Easier to see opportunities for collaboration

• Identified priority research areas

– Revisiting Kenya experience

• Enhanced collaboration with LaF?

Reflections

• Important to keep in mind that we need to track indicators for outcomes all along the pathway, not just related to diet and nutrition outcomes

• Developing TOCs from research outputs to IDOs, provides insights into potential research impacts, and evidence gaps

– Implications for M&E and for research

• Some success getting research teams and others engaged, need to do more

www.a4nh.cgiar.org

Photos: N.Palmer/CIAT

johnson a4 nh-ispc

Science