Evaluating Bioversity International’s banana networks

Evaluating Bioversity International’s Banana Networks

Genowefa Blundo Canto and Elisabetta GotorBioversity International Impact Assessment Unit

Presented by Inge Van den BerghRTB Annual Meeting

Uganda, 30 September 2014

Source: RTB extension request

Shared R4D impact pathway

Shared R4D impact pathway

• Partnerships needed at different levels to increase potential of program to achieve positive outcomes and impacts on vulnerable groups

• Number of formal and informal networks, engaged at different stages of the impact pathway, and at different levels (global, regional, national, local)

Banana networks

Global banana researchfacilitation platformsGL

OBAL

LOCAL

REGIO

NAL

Regional banana research and innovation platforms

National systems

RESEARCH OUTPUTS RESEARCH OUTCOMES FIRST LEVELDEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES

INTERMEDIATE DEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES

Global banana information andknowledge sharing platform

Study objective

• To assess the nature and effectiveness of selected banana networks under the umbrella of RTB

• Specific attention given to understanding:– the network’s members, outputs produced and

outcomes generated– how the network’s services and products are

perceived and used by network members– who the network’s next users are and how they are

influenced by the network

Study methodology

• Based on the paper by Innovations for Scaling Impact and Keystone Accountability (2010), who reviewed the field of network monitoring and evaluation, providing an interesting framework to analyse networks

• Bioversity’s networks effectiveness is assessed along 3 interlinked categories:

Network VibrancyTo measure diversity of

network members, partners and next users,

degree of network members’ participation to

network activities, and alignment of priorities and

shared values

Network ConnectivityTo measure if the network

is fostering communication and

collaboration between members and with next

users

Network EffectsTo measure progress

towards achieving outputs, outcomes and

impacts for members and beyond, the added value

and unique role of the network, and who are the next users benefiting from

network outputs

Study methodology

Online user surveys

Key informant interviews with selected network

members, based on types of answers received

Official Bioversity reports and network

publications

Documents provided by key informants

during the interviews

Information from the network’s website

KEY RESULTS - PROMUSA

Network vibrancy

• Diversity of members and partners– ~700 members, with good diversity in terms of

gender, length of membership, geography, type of institution, type of activities and thematic coverage well represented in respondents’ profile

– Also good diversity of partners, including research institutes, farmers’ organizations, private sector, local and national governments, policy makers, etc

This diversity contributes to the potential of the network to reach end-users with information and knowledge on banana

Network vibrancy

• Respondents’ participation to network activities– Members joined through online research (28%), on another

members’ suggestion (25%) or through events (13%) online presence and networking activities relevant to reach out to new members

– Online: 2013: ~84,000 visits, >200,000 page views, 209 countries*

– Events: 20% recently attended ProMusa event;non-participation not due to lack of interest but mainly to lack of funding; these events are of clear interest to members, and 50% regularly consult proceedings

Recommendation: Set-up of travel grants/fellowships to participate in events

* The Bioversity office in Montpellier is excluded from all web statistics

Network vibrancy• Alignment of priorities and shared values

– Overall good alignment between ProMusa’s stated priorities and values, and those of its users

– Seen as a hub and dissemination place for information on banana, where updated information can be easily found

– Seen also as a platform that facilitates collaboration and networking in the broader banana community

– Several respondents think ProMusa should have active research role (which is not its role); or be directly involved in genetic diversity studies (which is more role of MusaNet)

Recommendation: While key role in knowledge sharing is well recognized, other aspects of core business should be more clearly communicated in order to fully align the vision of the network to that of its members

Network connectivity

• Is the network fostering collaboration and communication between members and with next users?– Participation in ProMusa appears to foster collaboration outside of

the network– InfoMus@ most successful service– Mailing lists seen as fundamental service to exchange opinions

and find solutions to problems– Up-to-date information coming from ProMusa is vital, especially

alerts (e.g. TR4 alert Mozambique shared by members to create phytosanitary alert)

– Frequent exchange with people from other places key to gain knowledge on how other people are addressing problems

‘The interaction between experts in different places contributes to finding solutions to very context-specific problems.’

Key informant


• Is dissemination and capacity strengthening within and outside the network being fostered?– Many respondents focus on capacity strengthening potential

channel for the information and knowledge shared by ProMusa to reach next users

– A quarter of respondents train others as a result of participating in ProMusa, using information and knowledge obtained through the network

Recommendations for improvement: • Engage more regional practitioners• Diversify membership beyond researchers• Foster more direct interaction with farmers, especially

through dissemination and capacity building

Network effects

• Progress in achieving outputs, outcomes and impacts – ProMusa very successful in increasing sources of knowledge that

people have available for their work (61%) and in improving its members’ capacity (40%)

– 50% mention KRC as their main source of information– Provides type and quality of services that its members expect:

• Valued high or very high:– Timely information on network events (75%)– Transparent and efficient flow of information (72%)– High quality knowledge services (69%)– Keeping members updated on scientific breakthrough news

• Less positive:– Support to and coordination of research partnerships – not surprising as this is

not ProMusa’s role– Strengthening members’ capacity – also not core role, but need for ProMusa

to reconsider its role in capacity strengthening

Network effects

• What is added value and unique role of the network? – Provides global access to reliable and updated

information on banana production and research in one place (51%)

– Connects free of charge different people worldwide with the same goal (32%)

– Provides materials that are used to train others

‘‘The real time dynamic that provides answers to problems everywhere in the world.’

Key informant

Network effects

• Who are the next users benefiting from network outputs and how do they benefit?– Respondents provide training to:• Farmers, through field days and capacity building

events• Technicians and other researchers

– Information and knowledge provided by ProMusa particularly relevant for these activities, and is sometimes adapted for the purpose, the target audience and the local context

KEY RESULTS - REGIONAL NETWORKS

Network vibrancy

• Diversity of members, partners and next users– Lower diversity in members, in terms of type of institution

– But good diversity in partners, esp. within member’s own country

BAPNET BARNESA MUSALAC INNOVATE PLANTAIN

0.00%20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%

100.00%

National governmentNational agricultural research systemAcademic institution/research instituteOther

BAPNET BARNESA MUSALAC INNOVATE PLANTAIN

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%Local or national research instituteRegional or international research instituteAcademic institutionFarmers' organisationCommunity-based organisationNon-governmental organisationFunder/grant-making organisationLocal or subnational government authorityNational governmentIntergovernmental organizationLocal or national private sector company/businessRegional or international private sector company/business Communications/mediaIndependent consultants/freelancesStudentsOtherNo partners

Network vibrancy

– Network members bring a variety of expertise,:• MUSALAC, BARNESA: crop management and plant pathology• Innovate Plantain: production and distribution of planting material• BAPNET: ex situ conservation and crop improvement

– Members have established new relationships with different types of actors as a result of participating in the network

Overall, further diversification of members in terms of thematic coverage (e.g. marketing and post harvest) and types of partners (e.g. policy makers and private sector) would increase the reach of the networks

Network vibrancy

• Members’ participation to network activities– Engagement with regional network activities is

quite good, especially among BAPNET and MUSALAC respondents, who have all attended recent network meetings, while most of them also participated in training activities

Network vibrancy

• Alignment of priorities and shared values– Primary roles:

• Foster collaboration• Link actors from different countries• Set priorities for banana research in the region• Facilitate development of research projects and partnerships• Identifying funding for research projects within agreed agenda• Coordinate banana activities in the region• Disseminate information• Strengthen capacity of technical staff/researchers• Capacity building for researchers

Overall good alignment, but some discrepancy regarding role in resource mobilization


• Is the network fostering communication and collaboration between members and with next users?– Most frequently mentioned types of collaborations:

• BARNESA: research projects with partners within and outside the network, and training of others

• BAPNET: capacity building events, especially with partners within the network• MUSALAC: capacity building activities outside the network as a result of

participation in the network, and training of others• Innovate Plantain: training of others, mainly directed towards people within

the same organization

– Most respondents say that level of collaboration has increased through their participation in the network

– Stronger collaboration between members who have been in the network longer, which might be an indicator of cohesion of the network


• Is the network fostering information and knowledge sharing between members and with next users?– The regional networks’ websites and the

ProMusa’s website are main sources of information

– However, respondents would like more frequent and condensed updates directly delivered to them, and would like to see more regionally relevant information and materials

Network effects• Network effectiveness:

– BAPNET:• Very effective in knowledge sharing and enhancing scientific and research capacity• Less effective in enhancing members' capacity to mobilise resources

– BARNESA:• Very effective in knowledge sharing and enhancing capacity to work in partnership• Less effective in coordinating advocacy actions

– MUSALAC:• Very effective in coordinating advocacy actions, creating new knowledge, knowledge

sharing, enhancing scientific and research capacity and capacity to work in partnership

• Less effective in mobilizing resources– Innovate Plantain:

• Very effective in knowledge sharing• Less effective in brokering partnerships or enhancing members’ capacity to mobilise

resources

Network effects• Main network outcomes:

– BAPNET: improved pest and disease management, improved knowledge on banana, and availability of improved technologies

– BARNESA: availability of improved varieties or new technologies, increased level of knowledge sharing between member countries, also leading to improved pest and disease management

– MUSALAC: increased collaboration through research projects, dissemination of knowledge and information, awareness on pests and diseases, and improved pest and disease management strategies

– Innovate Plantain: introduction of improved technologies, especially for production of healthy planting material, and capacity and organization strengthening

– For all 4 networks, increasing collaborative projects between member countries on topics of common interest could achieve higher influence in the regions

– Higher engagement of the networks in advocacy actions with policy makers would increase visibility

Conclusions• General results emphasize that networks are a crucial element of

the shared research-for-development impact pathway• The networking approach is based on the recognition that through

partnerships with different institutional actors, the research outcomes are adapted to different needs and achieve greater impact than in isolation

• Effective networking needs to be backed up by national and regional policies, increasing local ownership leading to local investment

• Key for the effectiveness of the networks are the creation and maintenance of links between the global and the regional networks, and with other local networks, to leverage knowledge and capacity

Key recommendations

• ProMusa:– Already good level of diversity of members and next users, but

engaging further beyond scientific community could increase the network’s reach

– Considering that respondents adapt information to their situation, it might be useful to develop best practices and simple guidelines, differentiated by region, that are easy to adapt and share with farmers

– Events organized by ProMusa are important for respondents Providing funding opportunities would improve engagement with the network and its effects (e.g. travel grant)

– Actual on-the-ground training might be beyond the scope of ProMusa, but the platform should acts as facilitator for capacity strengthening, e.g. mentorship scheme for young scientists or exchange visits for scientists/extension workers

Key recommendations

• Regional networks:– Need to measure and highlight the outcomes of their activities

through the use of adequate M&E developing impact pathways for the networks within the theory of change of RTB

– Should facilitate training and collaboration with local institutes to strengthen local capacity and improve the long-term sustainability of the network

– Diversification of members would increase the knowledge, reach and visibility of the networks impact pathways being developed for evolving RTB flagships will strengthen partnerships to reach out more explicitly to development partners

THANK YOUhttp://www.promusa.org

http://banana-networks.org/

Evaluating Bioversity International’s banana networks

Science

Transcript of Evaluating Bioversity International’s banana networks