English, PDF, 630kb
The evaluation report clearly documents that the treatment and control groups of farmers had substantially different characteristics, making it impossible to use the control group as a valid counterfactual in the evaluation. The evaluation report makes a compelling case for the use of an alternative evaluation approach, because a counterfactual could not be established.
English, PDF, 4,283kb
The MCC compact with Armenia was a five-year investment(2006-2011) of $177.6 million in two projects: irrigated agriculture and rural road rehabilitation. Although most output and outcome targets were met or exceeded, the evaluation did not detect impacts on adoption, productive income or household income.
English, PDF, 1,897kb
In dairy, the evaluation estimates there were impacts on adoption and increases in farm income. In horticulture, the evaluation estimates impacts on adoption, but no impacts on farm income. In handicrafts, the evaluation estimates impacts on employment for program participants, but no impacts were detected on productive income.
English, PDF, 780kb
The independent evaluation found varied results looking at farm income and household consumption. In addition, although the evaluation was not originally designed to test whether or not farm investments increased as a result of the training and increase in farm income, the evaluators did look at changes in investments in mobile and fixed capital in order to potentially explain why they were not finding changes in household consumption.
English, PDF, 809kb
The evaluation found varied results for the three regions invested in under the Commercial Training Activity. The evaluation showed no impact on yields or crop incomes on average across the three regions. However, northern region farmers’ annual crop income increased significantly relative to the control group, over and above any impacts recorded in the other zones.
English, , 1,280kb
This review of Australia’s rural development assistance found that the lives of large numbers of poor rural people had been improved as a result of Australian interventions. Australian aid has helped poor rural women and men access more value from new markets for example.
English, , 1,020kb
The main purpose of this Evaluation has been to analyse and to document – in a gender perspective – the results and the lessons learned from using the Farmer Field School approach in the Agriculture Sector Programme Support Phase II.
English, , 3,220kb
The main research question of this review is: ‘what is the evidence for, and nature of, the impact of development interventions on food security in developing countries?’
English, Excel, 1,265kb
The two projects evaluated were found to be relevant to the ODA policies of both KOICA and MOFAFF, as the projects were aimed at supporting the Cambodian government in poverty alleviation and rural development.
English, , 959kb
This study provides an assessment of the overall performance of agricultural input subsidy programmes in Malawi, Zambia, Ghana and Tanzania, where so-called “smart” subsidies have been introduced in an attempt to maximise effects at the lowest possible costs.