Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of agricultural research in Latin America and the Caribbean

  • Published:
Knowledge, Technology & Policy

Abstract

This article assesses the state of evaluation, and identifies priorities for improving evaluation, in agricultural research organizations in the region of Latin America and the Caribbean in the early 1990s. Based on thirteen case studies conducted in 1992, the article describes the institutional settings and regional patterns, and trends in evaluation practice. Illustrative cases from Argentina, Brazil, and Guatemala are presented. The organizations studied have extensive experience with evaluation; however, this experience has not been well documented or shared. Evaluation is generally the weakest phase in the management cycle. In the past, most evaluations have been extrinsically motivated, and as such, they have been of little use to local researchers and managers. Obstacles to improving evaluation include the centralization of administrative systems, weak program management, a lack of understanding of potential uses of evaluation in management, and limited knowledge of appropriate evaluation methods. Agricultural research managers feel that evaluation training should be provided as one component of a broader effort covering planning, monitoring, and evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alston, J.M., Norton, G.W., and Pardey, P.G. (1995). Science under scarcity: Principles and practice for agricultural research evaluation and priority setting. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avila, A.F. (1989). Métodos e indicadores de evaluación del impacto socioeconómico de la investigación agraria: Experiencia brasileña con énfasis en EMBRAPA. In A.R. Novoa (ed.), Agricultura, tecnología y desarrollo: Cómo se evalúa la investigación agraria en América Latina. Bogotá: Tercer Mundo Editores.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballantyne, P. and Uribe, B. (1993). Bibliometrics. In D. Horton, P. Ballantyne, W. Peterson, B. Uribe, D. Gapasin, and K. Sheridan (eds.), Monitoring and evaluating agricultural research: A sourcebook, pp. 43–48. Wallingford: CAB International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, S.D. and Smith, G. (1998). Beyond Methodologies: Coalition-Building for Participatory Technology Development. World Development, 26(2), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, J. and Holland, J. (eds.) (1998). Who changes? Institutionalizing participation in development. London, UK: Intermediate Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges-Andrade, J. and Quirino, T.R. (1989). Mensuracao de qualidade de publicacoes e comparacao com outras medidas de efetividade organizacional em pesquisa aplicada. Ciencia e Cultura, 41(2):138–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges-Andrade, J., Guimarães, T.A., and Afanasieff, R. (1990). Qualidade da pesquisa e ambiente organizational. Revista de Administracao, 25(1):61–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges-Andrade, J. (1992). Workshop de avaliacao global da EMBRAPA. Brasília: Empresa Brasileira do Pesquisa Agropecuaria (EMBRAPA) — SEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges-Andrade, J. (1994). Preditores individuais e ambientais da producao do pesquisador. Revista de Administracao, 29(4):73–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges-Andrade, J. and Horton, D. (1994). Planificación, seguimiento y evaluación en la EMBRAPA, Brasil. In A.R. Novoa and D. Horton (eds.), Administración de la investigación agropecuaria: Experiencia en las américas. Santa Fe de Bogotá: Tercer Mundo Editores.

    Google Scholar 

  • Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) Secretariat. (1995). Renewal of the CGIAR sustainable agriculture for food security in developing countries. Washington, D.C.: CGIAR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, P.R. and Barclay, A.H. (1982). AID experience in agricultural research: A review of project evaluations. AID Program Evaluation Discussion Paper No. 13. Washington, D.C.: United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cremers, M.W. and Roseboom, J. (1997). Agricultural research in government agencies in Latin America: A preliminary assessment of investment trends. ISNAR Discussion Paper No. 97-7. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, E.R., Palma, V., and Avila, A.F. (1982). Taxas de retorno dos investimentos da EMBRAPA: Investimentos totais e capital físico. Brasília: Empresa Brasileira do Pesquisa Agropecuaria (EMBRAPA) — DDM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, D. (1987). Evaluation in national agricultural research. Proceedings of a Workshop, Singapore, July 7–9 1986. Ottawa: International Development Research Center (IDRC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Echeverría, R.G. (1990). Diagnosing research system constraints. In R.G. Echeverría (ed.), Methods for diagnosing research system constraints and assessing the Impact of agricultural research. Vol. 1. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Echeverría, R.G., Trigo, E.J., and Byerlee, D. (1998). Financing agricultural research in Latin America. In S.R. Tabor, W. Janssen, and H. Bruneau (eds.), Financing agricultural research: A sourcebook. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconi, C.A. (1993). Economic evaluation. In D. Horton, P. Ballantyne, W. Peterson, B. Uribe, D. Gapasin, and K. Sheridan (eds.), Monitoring and evaluating agricultural research: A sourcebook, pp. 65–75. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, O.N. (1994). Experiencias latinoamericanas en seguimiento y evaluación. Quito: Fondo Internacional de Desarrollo Agrícola (FIDA) and the Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura (IICA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsworthy, P. and Gapasin, D. (1993). Internal program review. In D. Horton, P. Ballantyne, W. Peterson, B. Uribe, D. Gapasin, and K. Sheridan (eds.), Monitoring and evaluating agricultural research, pp. 108–112. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, D.R. (1994). Planificación, seguimiento y evaluación en El INTA, Argentina. In A.R. Novoa and D. Horton (eds.), Administración de la investigación agropecuaria: Experiencia en las américas. Santa Fe de Bogotá: Tercer Mundo Editores.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, D. (1999). Building capacity in planning, monitoring and evaluation: Lessons from a development project in Latin America. Knowledge, Technology, & Policy (in this volume).

  • Horton, D. (1998). Disciplinary roots and branches of evaluation: Some lessons from agricultural research. Knowledge & Policy, 10(4):32–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, D., Ballantyne, P., Peterson, W., Uribe, B., Gapasin, D., and Sheridan, K. (eds.) (1994). Seguimiento y evaluación de la investigación agropecuaria: Manual de referencia. Santa Fe de Bogota: Tercer Mundo Editores.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, D., Ballantyne, P., Peterson, W., Uribe, B., Gapasin, D., and Sheridan, K. (eds.) (1993). Monitoring and evaluating agricultural research: A sourcebook. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, D. and Uribe, B. (1992). Fortalecimiento de la administración de la investigación agropecuaria en América Latina y El Caribe: Informe del taller de planeación del proyecto. Report of a Workshop, Bogotá, Colombia, June 9–12, 1992. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, D., Ballantyne, P., and Uribe, B. (1991). The many faces of M&E: A progress report on the literature. In Highlights of a consultation on monitoring and evaluation of agricultural research, The Hague, November 12–14, 1990. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Leeuw, F.L., Rist, R.C., and Sonnichsen, R.C. (eds.) (1994). Can governments learn? Comparative perspectives on evaluation and organizational learning. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackay, R. (1996). Undertaking ESL/ELFR programme review for accountability and improvement. In T. Hedge and N. Whifney (eds.), Power pedagogy and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill-Sands, D.M., Biggs, S.D., Bingen, R.J., Ewell, P.T., McAllister, J.L., and Poats, S.V. (1991). Institutional considerations in strengthening on-farm client-oriented research in national agricultural research systems: Lessons from a nine-country study. Experimental Agriculture, 27:343–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill-Sands, D.M. and Collion, M.H. (1993). Making the farmer’s voice count in agricultural research. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, 32(3):260–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. (1983). Strengthening the agricultural research capacity of the less developed countries: Lessons from AID experience. AID Program Evaluation Report No. 10. Washington, D.C.: United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielson, J. (1992). Planning, monitoring and evaluation in the Agricultural Research Center Washington State University. ISNAR Discussion Paper No. 92-05. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Novoa, A.R. (ed.) (1989). Agricultura, tecnología y desarrollo: Cómo se evalúa la investigación agraria en América Latina. Bogotá: Tercer Mundo Editores.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novoa, A.R. and Horton, D. (eds.) (1994a). Administración de la investigación agropecuaria: Experiencia en las américas. Santa Fe de Bogotá: Tercer Mundo Editores.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novoa, A.R. and Horton, D. (1994b). Planificación, seguimiento y evaluación de la investigación agropecuaria en las américas: Una síntesis. In A.R. Novoa and D. Horton (eds.), Administración de la investigación agropecuaria: Experiencia en las américas. Santa Fe de Bogotá: Tercer Mundo Editores.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okali, C., Sumberg, J., and Farrington, J. (1994). Farmer participatory research. London, UK: Intermediate Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pardey, P.G., Roseboom, J., and Anderson, J.R. (1991). Regional perspectives on national agricultural research. In P.G. Pardey, J. Roseboom, and J.R. Anderson (eds.), Agricultural research policy: International quantitative perspectives, pp. 197–263. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, W. (1993). Development-Agency M&E. In D. Horton, P. Ballantyne, W. Peterson, B. Uribe, D. Gapasin, and K. Sheridan (eds.), Monitoring and evaluating agricultural research: A sourcebook. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, W. and Horton, D. (1993). External reviews. In D. Horton, P. Ballantyne, W. Peterson, B. Uribe, D. Gapasin, and K. Sheridan (eds.), Monitoring and evaluating agricultural research: A sourcebook, pp. 76–84, Wallingford, UK: CAB International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, D.L. and Anderson, J.R. (1997). Agricultural extension and research: Achievements and problems in national systems. A World Bank Operations Evaluation Study. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirino, T.R. and Borges-Andrade, J. (1987). Mensuracao de efetividade e eficiencia de organizacoes de pesquisa aplicada: Um abordagem multifinalista. Revista de Administracao, 22(2):55–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirino, T.R. and Aragao, P. (1990). Grupos sociais e desempenho das organizacoes de pesquisa agropecuária. Cadernos de Difusao de Tecnologia, 7(1–3):47–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirino, T.R. and Xavier, O.S. (1990). Qualidade da vida no trabalho e desempenho de organizacoes de pesquisa. Ciencia e Cultura, 42(11):901–911.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirino, T.R., Cruz, E.R., and de Souza, G. (1992). O processo de producao de conhecimiento em organizacoes de pesquisa agropecuária: Diagnóstico de projetos. Brasília: Empresa Brasileira do Pesquisa Agropecuaria (EMBRAPA) — SEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reijmerinck, J. and Uribe, B. (1991). ISNAR diagnostic reviews: An analysis of recommendations. Report prepared for the external review panel, Background Paper No. 4. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Romano, L.O. (1994). Planificación, seguimiento y evaluación en El ICTA, Guatemala. In A.R. Novoa and D. Horton (eds.), Administración de la investigación agropecuaria: Experiencia en las américas. Santa Fe de Bogotá: Tercer Mundo Editores.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P.M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sousa, I.S. (1992). A sociedade, o pesquisador e o problema da pesquisa. Brasília: Empresa Brasileña do Pesquisa Agropecuaria (EMBRAPA) — SEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Souza, J. and Flores, M.X. (1993). Strategic management of agricultural research: The EMBRAPA experience. Public Administration and Development, 13(3):249–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stufflebeam, D.L. (1983). The CIPP model for program evaluation. In G. Madaus, M. Scriven, and D.L. Stufflebeam (eds.), Evaluation models, pp. 117–141. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. (1995). Participatory Approaches in Government Bureaucracies: Facilitating the Process of Institutional Change. World Development, 23(9), 1521–1554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigo, E.J. (1995). Agriculture, technological change, and the environment in Latin America: A 2020 perspective. Food, Agriculture, and the Environment Discussion Paper No. 9. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    Google Scholar 

  • Uribe, B. and Horton, D. (1993). Planeación, seguimiento y evaluación de la investigación agropecuaria: Experiencias en las américas. Report of a Regional Workshop, CIMMYT, Mexico, October 15–22, 1992. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, W.F. (1991). Social theory for action: How individuals and organizations learn to change. London, UK: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), The Netherlands

    Douglas Horton (employed)

  2. Florida State University-Tallahassee, USA

    Jairo E. Borges-Andrade

Authors
  1. Douglas Horton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jairo E. Borges-Andrade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Douglas Horton or Jairo E. Borges-Andrade.

Additional information

Since joining ISNAR in 1990, he has engaged in research, training, and advisory work on research management, with an emphasis on evaluation. Previously, for fifteen years Horton was head of the social science department of the International Potato Center in Peru. Horton received B.s. and M.S. degrees in agricultural economics from the University of Illinois and a Ph.D. in economics from Cornell University. His current interests include action research and learning, organizational assessment, and institutionalization of planning, monitoring, and evaluation.

He worked for fourteen years at the Brazilian Corporation for Agricultural Research, conducting research and development activities in the areas of human resources and of strategic management. He is a full professor at the Department of Social and Work Psychology, Institute of Psychology, University of Brasilia, Brazil, where he teaches and advises at the undergraduate and graduate levels and does research and consulting. His current areas of interest are organizational behavior, training, organizational evaluation, and science and technology management.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Horton, D., Borges-Andrade, J.E. Evaluation of agricultural research in Latin America and the Caribbean. Know Techn Pol 11, 42–68 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12130-999-1003-7

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12130-999-1003-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation